The arguments I have just made are not perfect and have some obvious flaws that some philosophers would strongly disagree with, while there are other arguments that some of the great philosophers would agree with agreement. I will criticize the arguments I have just made using the perspective of three different philosophers who all have their own ideas about how the state should function and the role of the citizen. The three philosophers I will use in this critique will be Karl Marx, John Stewart Mill, and John Locke. The reason I chose these three philosophers is because they all agree with some aspects of my writings, while disagreeing with others. One will disagree with the role of the state and citizens, but will agree with the legalization of recreational drug use, while the other two will agree with the role of the state and citizens, but they will not agree with the legalization of drug use. Karl Marx is the philosopher who would I disagree with many of the arguments I have presented above. The reason Marx would disagree with so many of my arguments is because he firmly believes that the state is responsible for society and has complete control over its citizens. The society I have created is largely a free society in which people are responsible for their own actions and the government has a limited role in the daily transactions that occur between citizens. Marx would believe that in my society where there are different social classes, these classes would always be in battle with each other and exploit the lower class so that they can gain a greater profit. In my society where the political economy is capitalism, there will be a wide variety of incomes. Some citizens will be more intelligent, others... middle of paper... violent philosophers have shown that there are some minor criticisms of my theory; however the general theories and principles are generally accepted and promoted in the writings of Marx, Mill and Locke. Marx was the only one who would have agreed with the legalization of recreational drug use, while Mill and Locke would not have been in favor due to the harm it would likely cause to other people involved in using these drugs. Regarding the function of the state, Mill and Locke would have agreed with my writing because the state is limited and citizens are free to do as they wish as long as they do not interfere with the rights of other citizens. Marx would not have agreed with this because his philosophy of the state is communism. All three of these philosophers all agreed on some aspects and disagreed on other aspects of my writing.