Please take a careful look at the prompt and the grading rubric criteria before you start writing. This is extremely important for you to notice it, since you MUST follow the prompt and the instruction as it’s given detail. I need a perfect paper, please do it right rather do it fast so you won’t have to re-do it again. I will not approve the paper if its not done correctly. Note: Please again, take careful look at the prompt and the paper rubric criteria. No mistake. I expect you to do it right in the first time. You can do outside sources, but it must be use actual citation style. Do it right, you must look at the rubric to this paper correctly. Everything that I’ve been given out very clear. Read over and over again, make sure you understand. Here is the book to read: Scott, James. Two Cheers for Anarchism: Six Easy Pieces on Autonomy, Dignity, and Meaningful Work and Play. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. Direct citations are required!!!
Prompt: Political Order, Liberty, and the State
Liberal theorists such as John Locke believe that states are necessary for addressing the inconveniences of the state of nature. Similar to Hobbes, liberals believe that sovereign states help to maintain political order, thus helping to protect individual rights. But unlike Hobbes, liberals believe that sovereign states should be duly restrained so that they cannot threaten individual rights, Indeed, liberal democracies are generally intended to maintain political order without devolving into tyranny. Anarchists, on the other hand, believe that all states threaten human autonomy. On their view, it is possible for individuals to cooperate without hierarchy or state rule, and as a result, all states lack political legitimacy. Using the readings and course discussions, please answer the following questions: how can individuals create political order without devolving into tyranny? Are anarchists right in saying that all states, regardless of type, are inconsistent with the ideals of freedom and autonomy, and if so what implications does this have? If not, why not?
This is not an English class, but please be mindful of your word choices, spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Also, please proofread your paper for typos and incomplete sentences. Since you are writing an argumentative essay, you should be clear and direct on where you stand. Somewhere in your introductory paragraph, you should clearly outline your thesis, and you should spell out how you aim to defend it. It is OK for you to use personal pronouns. That is, you can say “In this paper, I will defend X, Y, and Z…” In fact, I strongly encourage you to do this because it will improve the clarity of your argument.
In addition, your paper should have a clearly discernible introduction, body, and conclusion. You are not required to use section headings, but this can improve the clarity of your writing. In the introduction, you need to briefly outline your thesis. In the body of the essay, you need to defend your argument, and you should also consider possible counterarguments. Finally, in the conclusion, you should briefly restate your thesis so that it sticks with your reader.
Your paper will be graded on the basis of how well it is written and argued. Since everyone disagrees, you do not need to convince me, personally, that your argument is right. However, you need to build a convincing case, which means that you need to clearly set forth reasons for why your view should be accepted, you need to consider possible counterarguments, and so forth