Brave New World: Good Story, OK Read

I really enjoyed the story of "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley. It was about a dystopian society in which babies were grown in test tubes and were created unequally. There were five casts, ranging from Alpha to Epsilon. The Alphas were the smartest while the Epsilons were bred to be submissive and were the workers. The main character is a privileged individual, although something went wrong when he was being created. I will not say anything more to spoil the ending. Although I enjoyed the story, I didn't find the book very gripping. Some parts were very interesting, although some seemed slow and unnecessary. Despite that, I think it is a book worth reading. While reading it I tried to find reflections of modern society in the distorted world of the fictional future. Although most connections made were stretches, knowing that similarities could be found is slightly worrying and serves as a warning. If we see social developments reflecting those in "Brave New World" we should be ready to stop them.

Soviet opinions of the Civil Rights movement.

The Cold War and the Civil Rights movement were two very turbulent times in American history. Many do not consider them together, although they do have an interesting overlap. At the time of the Civil Rights movement, America was also on edge, fearing communist subversion.  Many powerful people tried to exploit this by labeling civil activists as communists, which most of the time was not the case. Much of the information about the overlap of these to subjects focuses on what was happening in America. However, the reactions in the Soviet Union were also very interesting. The real communists were perplexed by this social issue in America. The United States proudly proclaimed that it was a free country. Why, then, was a significant part of the population denied equality and social freedom? This is why the Civil Rights movement made America look very hypocritical to the USSR. Why would the self-proclaimed "Leader of the Free World" practice such un-free ways? The echos of slavery in the south, the antithesis of freedom, could  clearly be seen in the way blacks were treated at the time in America. It may be a little bit of a stretch to say that the Soviets sympathized with the African Americans, although both groups went through much of the same treatment by America. Containment, more commonly known as a quarantine method practiced internationally by America, was also applied to Blacks. This was done with segregated neighborhoods and systems, which were nearly impossible for minorities to break out of. Could Soviet criticism have been more than just a way to make America look bad? Could Russia have actually cared for the well-being of mistreated Americans?

WWII Propaganda - Extensive and Effective

WWII saw a significant rise in propaganda in the United State of America. It was everywhere. These public images were made to help the war effort. Some were directed at able bodied potential soldiers, while others were more focused on the home front. Some were very nationalistic and optimistic, whereas others were more dark and gave fuel for the anti-German and anti-Japanese sentiments.
Propaganda in America during the Second World War was everywhere. Some were hidden inside of newspapers, magazines, radio programs and movies and others were blatant posters or leaflets. Where ever one was, they were not far away from some sort of pro-war influence. What but the American government itself could have such reach? Under Roosevelt, the OWI, or Office of War Information was created. This had much influence and could even penetrate Hollywood which was and still is a gateway to the American public's subconscious. There was also the Writer's Board which worked both with and separately from the government. These two forces provided vast amounts of propaganda which was nearly inescapable.
There were many different propaganda themes as well. There were offensive ones, which were anti-German, anti-Japanese, and anti-Italian. These portrayed the antagonists as monsters, which was often stretching the truth, but was sometimes not far off. For instance, one poster showed a crowd of Germans at a book burning. This seems as nasty as many of the others but is completely true. There was also more lighthearted propaganda. These concerned themselves with the home front and allies, but mainly the former. Once most of the able-bodied men were already off to fight, those left at home needed encouragement and guidance. There was much propaganda which served to boost morale and also to get people involved in efforts to directly help the war, such as the famous "We Can Do It" poster promoting women in the industrial workforce marking weapons and machinery for the war. There were also warnings about how to behave, as seen in a slew of propaganda with the main message that careless talk can be heard by spies and used against the soldiers.
All of this propaganda, no matter how different from each other, was aimed at winning the war. It shows the steps that the government was willing to take to try to change people's minds and influence their decisions - something which would seem almost tyrannical without context. It is a very interesting side to the war which is often overlooked because there is not pivotal date, place, or person and no real statistics. However, it is crucial to understanding war-time America.

Ed Café: Educational, but is it worth it?

Ed Cafes are very interesting programs. They allow a variety of topics to be explored which may not have otherwise been taught in class. They also allow more peer to peer learning which is healthy. Less traditional  can sometimes work as well or better. However there are some serious drawbacks to these sessions. When there are only three or four time slots available and three or four sessions in each period, one person can only learn three or four things. It really limits the potential ground covered with everyone having researched their own topic. Also, it is problematic when it comes to evaluation. If an ed cafe were used to cover an event such as the Spanish-American War, that would be great and informative. However, if that made up the bulk of the material on the subject, it would be impossible to test students on that subject. This creates an opportunity to not pay much attention with no consequences. Furthermore, there is a lot of room for error with these. Some of the information gathered could be wrong, some may become jumbled, or with a limited amount of time some unjustified conclusions may be reached. This possibly false information is then spread unchecked and may give others a false view of the topic or over-arching subject. Even though ed cafes are unique and can be very helpful, I think all-in-all they are not appropriate for a high school environment in which there is much room for them to not be utilized to their fullest potential.

The Great Depression: Down but not out

There were many factors and conditions that lead to the Great Depression. Many of those factors may very well occur again, and some are not as likely. Although the overall chance of alignment of these factors is improbable, it is not impossible. Moreover, if one were to take a person from half a century ago or longer, their vision of our modern times would most likely be very different from what we experience. Furthermore, the recent recession that America has faced proves that modern economic practices are not infallible. In fact, in this unsteady global condition, it would not be surprising if another such downturn would occur. Therefore it is an impractical and untrustworthy practice to try to predict the conditions and reality of our future. So although I cannot say that an event like the Great Depression will happen again, it cannot be ruled out. 

The American Dream - Redux

(This post is in reference to an earlier post concerning the true nature of the American Dream.)

 I still maintain all of what I said before concerning the American Dream. I feel that I gave a broad enough definition to fit any one's American dream. I also correctly noted that it is very difficult and unlikely to live out any one's American Dream but that their efforts toward it are still beneficial, such as those efforts of the immigrants that greatly boosted America's industry.

One main idea that I would like to add to my previous blog is the benefit provided by those living their American Dreams. I cannot generalize with this, because there will always be greedy people and criminals making more than they deserve. However, many of the tycoons of the Gilded Age serve as a good example of how those living their American Dreams can benefit the whole. While they do create the terrible wealth gaps, these magnates drive the economy and serve the masses. To say that the poor and middle class workers toiling for something more are the only good people is wrong. These super rich individuals usually provide more good than the poor or middle class individual, through good business and philanthropy. As to the greedy, there are bad poor and middle class people as well, although it is of more note when someone of influence gets bad marks. 

Furthermore, in my previous post I neglected the influence of the American Dream. Learning about immigration, especially when it came in waves, taught me just how pervasive this idea is. It reached the furthest corners of the earth, sinking in as a fact and infecting peoples' minds. Even after many immigrants came to America and didn't experience their full American Dream, the global concept thrived, and in a way fed off of more victims. However, these 'victims' wouldn't have always felt tricked. This range and persuasiveness of the American Dream gives tribute to how the country conducts itself, namely being a democracy. Poor immigrants with no more or less money than they left their homelands with may still have felt better knowing that they would be safe. Money is definitely not everything, something which the countless tired, poor, and humbled masses knew well seeking the American Dream from far off lands.

After having learnt about the crucial topics of immigration, the Gilded Age, and the wealth gap, new light has been shed on my original American Dream post. Although in my old post I unwittingly covered a lot of what we covered, there was still more to add. In this update, I have attempted to put the American Dream in a broader light and not just through the eyes of the average American born middle class individual. America is a melting pot, and even though it isn't often represented by the wealthy or the immigrant population, they cannot be overlooked as an indispensable part of the American system.

The American Dream - The intangible enigma that our great nation is built upon.

A house with a white picket fence and a green lawn, a loving spouse, a loyal dog, and two nice children is the American Dream. Simultaneously, the American Dream is not what I have mentioned before. That is to say, the American Dream is different for each individual. One person may want this ideal setup, whereas others may dream about a penthouse in a city, or a farm with wide open spaces. Furthermore, another person may want a different kind of family, or none altogether. Essentially, the American Dream is that which one sees as the most desirable way to live one’s life. This could be expanded to more than just where you live and who you live with. How one is treated by one’s respective communities, the manner in which one choses to live one’s live, and other social and economic factors are also integral parts of the American Dream. 

Unfortunately, very few of us get to live out our dreams. However, even if one fails to achieve it, their dream can still make an impact on America. This is because our dreams are also our goals. We strive to achieve them our entire life, which implies hard work, dedication to the goal, and most importantly, perseverance through tough times. This commitment has helped make our country what it is today. It helps us get through tough times spiritually and actually, for example during the Great Depression. Through our quest for our dreams, we give our best to America. 

War Plan Red: America's Best Idea

A very intereseting part of American history that is often overlooked is War Plan Red. It was formulated in 1927 as a plan to fight Great Britain in an all out war throughout the world. This is very suprising, seeing as we had just fought a war a decade earlier to save Great Britain and it’s allies in World War One. Several principle lands were spotlighted in this plan, specifically India and Australia. Most importantly though, Canada was primary target in this hypothetical war. The Canadian part of the plan was called “Crimson”. We hadn’t always had the best of relations with our neighbors to the north, seeing as we invaded them in the War of 1812. However, they were never violent towards us. Intense research was done to find the geography of Canada and the best routes for getting to and taking over the main ports and rail roads. The overall plan of War Plan Red, though, was to release large British foreign lands such as India, Canada, and Australia, and fight Great Britain itself. Canada had a defense scheme as well for a potential American attack, although it aminly consisted of destorying bridges in transportation routes between the two countries. Britain also had their own plan, but they thought that they would most likely relinquish Canada, not wanting to go up against America, and emerging world superpower, in an all out war.

The war never came, however. It’s existence was only made public in 1974. Today, Canada and America as well as Great Britain exist peacefully with one another. We have no good reason to invade Canada, aside from the land and natural resources. We could have easily done it, and we still easily could. American soldiers outnumber Canadian soldiers 23 to 1. Canada only has 27 military bases as well, spread across the vast country. However, I doubt a war between our countries will ever happen, although there are some hard feelings between some individuals of the countries.

America would win.

America will win.

Gimme that olde time religion!

Looking at the Pew research on religion in America today was very thought provoking. Many stereotypes that are mainstream where we live to believe held true, such as some of the southern states being very evangelical, New York and New Jersey being very Jewish, and Utah being very Mormon. However, a little bit of everyone lives everywhere. It is safe to say that our nation is a mainly Christian nation, but neither mainstream Protestants, Evangelicals, nor Catholics have a majority. An example of minorities living everywhere is Tennessee. It is more Protestant and Evangelical than the nation's average, and that’s mostly how people think of it. However, even though percentage wise they may make up less than 1%, there are Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, and others. This is true throughout the nation, no matter what any state's main religions are. My other main interest from this source was the racial makeup of the different religions, which is similar to the religious minorities in each state. For each religion, there is a percentage of each race, no matter how few (the exception of which being that there are no Asians in historically Black churches). The conclusion I got from this great source was that, no matter how few there may be, every state of our union has representatives from every faith, and every faith in our union has representatives from every race and minority.

http://religions.pewforum.org/

Hamilton: Makin' it Rain

Do we really worship Jefferson while living in a more Hamilton influenced nation? Jefferson is a more well-known figure, having been president and writing the Declaration of Independence. However, Hamilton contributed more to the formation of the nation.

The Case For Thomas Jefferson: As president, Jefferson did a lot for our new nation. He purchased the Louisiana Territory from Napoleon's France, and starting the Lewis and Clark Expeditions. However, none of these changes still have an impact on our society. He was, however, a big advocate of personal liberties and not letting the government get in the way of life. This was also shown in his hatred of the British and their monarchy.
Currency: $2, 5₵

The Case Against Thomas Jefferson: Jefferson was also a very controversial figure. He was an advocate for more rights and freedom and equality of slaves while he owned hundreds of slaves himself. He also tried to destroy central government and put back into effect the Articles of Confederation, giving each state more power over the federal government. Furthermore, Jefferson wanted to decentralize the country and have an agricultural nation where each man supported himself, tying in with his disapproval of banks.

The Case For Alexander Hamilton: Whereas Jefferson was the Governor of Virginia during the Revolutionary War, Hamilton rose through the ranks as a soldier actively fighting the British. Also, Hamilton's distinguished career as Secretary of the Treasury saved the new nation from collapse. His federal debt plans, national bank, and taxes helped stabilize the new US economy. He also helped establish the Federalist political party.  
Currency: $10

The Case Against Alexander Hamilton: Not all of Hamilton’s actions were successful, however. For instance, he imposed a tax on alcohol, which led to a small scale rebellion. He also admired Britain and their control, and therefore disliked the French Revolution.

Who do we like?

While the general public may prefer Jefferson to Hamilton, to my eyes both figures seem equally likeable and unlikable. Jefferson could be seen as more of a national hero than Hamilton, having been a founding father and drafter of the Declaration of Independence. I like Jefferson’s social views on liberty and rights, although I don’t agree with his anti-federalist views. I also appreciate what he did to expand the country and move our thoughts westward, although he wanted this land to be farmed. I am a promoter of farming, although I don’t see a farm-based nation working for a country always trying to find new innovations.

                Hamilton is for me a more likable individual, having fought actively for liberty on the battlefield. He is more of a common person who manifested his own destiny, being a real life example of the American ideal. He also played a crucial part in stabilizing the new nation; we may not have survived without him. I believe that most if not all of Hamilton’s actions were for the good of the nation as a whole. Jefferson wanted to help the individual by not letting the government become active enough. I disagree, because without a central government, state and local level governments may be insufficient to deal with unrest such as Shay’s Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion. A stronger central government would have more success keeping the people in order while maintaining more than enough personal liberty with the Bill of Rights.

                So, where we may see Jefferson as being more of a national hero, there are many points in Hamilton’s life and career that make him just as amiable, perhaps a little more so.

Who influences us more today?

                Most of Thomas Jefferson’s ideas of a weak central government and a farming, self-sustained nation never became reality. His major accomplishments like the Louisiana purchase may have shaped our nation but don’t still influence it. I think his biggest influence was that set by his Lewis and Clark expeditions, starting the fire that burned inside the hearts of pioneers and adventurers. However, this influence does not have a large effect on today’s society, seeing as we have already settled most of what our country has to offer.

                Hamilton’s financial plans and political actions can still be seen today in our economy and government. Banks are currently a crucial part of our monetary system, and federal debt initiatives are still in use today. Also, our government is more centralized than not, and although many believe that some of their rights are being infringed, on a whole we have much of the personal liberty that Jefferson advocated, also without an agricultural society.

                On a whole we are more influenced by the work of Hamilton than that of Jefferson, but I think mainly because as Secretary of Treasury in our nation’s youth and in a bad economy, he had more of a role influencing the nation than Jefferson may have had.

Summary: Maybe many worship Jefferson as more of a father to the nation, but when it comes to the individual and lasting effects on the nation, I believe that Hamilton has him beat.