Response to Passion is the Gale

While Eustace was writing about how emotions were ways to gauge social status, prestige, and power, I am not sure if just emotions are large enough drivers for historical change.  They are a way to show displeasure, to challenge, or to support historical changes but they are not what drives them.  Emotions are a claim to status for the elite and a form of communication among the elite.  Emotions were able to shape social communication because being able to properly express emotions is what separated the elite from the rest. Having control over your emotions was also an indication of status among the elite and could reveal or conceal motives within politics and power.  Having emotions and being able to properly express complex, powerful emotions were key to power in not only politics but also in social forums.  Being able to use correct language and communication skills are what give emotions their power. I think she wants to show that emotions do create historical change but I am not sure if she completely proves her argument.  It is more that people are expressing emotions in order to create change. Regardless of how people are actually feeling about an event or political modification, they express what emotion they feel will be able to make the most change. Passion and emotions give us the motivation to create social change but reason is what leads us to the correct choice.