rewrite the essay

Name

Instructor

Course

Date

Honest Graft

Section 1:

In the book, George Plunkitt attempts at making a distinction between honest and dishonest graft. The difference, as per the author, majorly lies in the manner utilized in acquisition of an advantage over others. To this end, the other states honest graft as the use of ones privileged position to get ahead of others. By representation, dishonest graft, as per the author, is the use of slander or tricks to defraud individuals. The author also gives various examples as distinction between honest and dishonest graft. For instance, a politician’s use of position to acquire wealth is viewed as conducting honest graft, while saloonkeepers are viewed as engaging in dishonest graft. I do not agree with the authors view. The main reason for my contention lies in ideological differences that transcend ethical lines. A politician using his office to gain advantage over other individuals, or even a public office holder using confidential information he is privy of for personal interests is tantamount to abuse of public office. I am of the conviction that by holding a public office, one serves the public interests and should champion for equal availing of not only resources, but also information on upcoming investment opportunities. A salon keeper, on the other hand, engages in honest graft since they do not oblige anyone to visit their salon but individuals do so seeking their services with full knowledge of their stipulated business terms and conditions. In the words of Plunkitt to explain honest graft, “I seen my opportunities and I took ‘em.”(RIORDIN, Chapter 1).

Section 2:

Plunkitt is of the assertion that any individual harboring political ambitions must never engage in drinking. His opinion is that by drinking, a politicians mind, making of judgment and diligence towards his duty is highly affected since such an individual cannot be entrusted to make well-informed decisions. Plunkitt is also quick to point out that he has nothing personal against those selling liquor, choosing to view this as a business proposition that he is in favor off. However, he draws the line when it comes to matters of power and inspiring development by stating that such individuals who drink cannot be entrusted to hold key positions. Plunkitt states that “…no matter how well you learn to play the political game, you won’t make a lastin’ success of it if you’re a drinkin’ man” (RIORDIN, Chapter 19). To substantiate this opinion, Plunkitt gives the example of various heads of city departments in Tammany where none can be regarded as a drinker, and when they do, it is usually nothing strong, only wine, apollinaris and vichy after meals. In a bid to stress the business proposition on liquor, Plunkitt uses the example of Little Tim Sullivan and Big Tim, who besides being leaders in a drinking area, none of them actually drinks.

Section 3:

Plunkitt views that the political party bosses within the Democratic Party are charged with ensuring the attainment of its initial vision as laid out by Thomas Jefferson. He is of the opinion that the views offered to the masses by these bosses should be more practical than theoretical in its call for change. Plunkitt is also of the view that the bosses should champion for the abolition of the civil service reforms in a bid to secure employment for the masses and increase the popularity of the Democratic Party. The views advanced by Plunkitt stem from the belief that over the years, the popularity of the party has waned owing to poor leadership by the party bosses.

Section 4:

The notion held by Plunkitt and his crowd about being patriotic is merely based on a fallacious view of the main factors at hand. The reasons offered to support such allegations can also be termed as being laughable at the very least. The main reasons offered by Plunkitt include the observation of the Fourth of July celebrations, the volunteering in the Spanish-American war, and the decoration of Tammy Hall using flags for celebrations. The reasons why I do not believe in the explanations offered by Plunkitt lies in the motivation behind their celebration. For instance, it is evident that the two hundred keg beers and the champagne cases motivate the Fourth of July attendance. The volunteering for war was motivated by the knowledge that the Governor did not need any more soldiers and the winning of an election only motivates the use of flags.

Section 5:

Plunkitts points out to various reform movements in the mid-to-late 1800s who attempted to clean up the political arena and the government in general. However, while the number of crusaders for reforms was many, the general thing about all of them is the short duration that they took to fade out into the oblivion without effecting any meaningful change into the political system. The main reason offered by Plunkitt to explain the failure of the reformers is the manner in which they are managed. Most of them are hurriedly constituted and attempt at changing a system of government machinery that has been around for quite some time. What the reformers fail to put into consideration is the fact that such governments are run by seasoned politicians who have taken years to master their political maneuvers. Ultimately, the results of any such reforms fizzle out quite fast since they are rendered incapable to handle the intricacies of politics. To stress his point, Plunkitt asserts that, “Do you understand now, why it is that a reformer goes down and out in the first or second round, while a politician answers to the gong every time? It is because the one has gone into the fight without trainin’, while the other trains all the time and knows every fine point of the game” (RIORDIN, Chapter 4).