Civil Cents

America the Beautiful: What We're Fighting for

I enjoyed reading this writing by Dinesh D'Souza. The author took a very complicated topic and made it easier to understand in just a few pages. The United States is the best country in the world. It is not perfect, but it is the best. We embrace differences in race, religion, social and political views, and others with open arms in a way, and on a scale, that no other country ever has. This diversity brings us strength. Our country is a melting pot for culture, ideas, invention and innovation. As D'Souza suggests, this is part of the problem. In some parts of the world our successes are looked on with envy, distaste, and even hatred. Our recent conflicts with Radical Islam is one example. Aside from not understanding our society, many Radical Islamic people see our society as an abomination to what their strict religion demands. In their religious views we are "the great satan" as they say. This mixed with the lack of opportunity for employment, education, security and lack of access to non-biased media in the middle east has created the animosity between their culture and ours. I don't know if anyone can honestly say they have a solution. I have been over to Iraq and Afghanistan and talked with enemy combatants, through an interpreter, after their capture. I don't see a way for it to end any time soon. The fastest way is to make them the same as us, but that will take generations of American occupation and enforcement of a democratic form of government in Iraq. I don't think our country has the patients for an Iraq project that will last that long. So we will come home, they will eventually devolve again, and we will continue to fight. America has tried again and again to change countries to be more like our own, and to spread Democracy, but we usually don't stay the course and put in the time, money, and effort to really make a change. Some people say it is not our business to try to change other countries to be more like us. I say, we are the strongest nation the world has ever seen and if other countries abuse and murder their own people we should overthrow thier leaders and teach the people how to govern themselves. I believe we have a moral responsibility to help liberate those who cannot liberate themsleves. The U.S. Special Forces Motto explains why our special forces exist and says it best: "To Free The Oppressed."

grammar post

I haven't used colons much in my writing. I decided to research them this week so I have another punctuation tool in my writing belt. According to:

http://www.esc.edu/ESConline/Across_ESC/WritersComplex.nsf/wholeshortlinks2/Punctuation+Points+Menu

There are four main ways to use a colon:

1. To signal a list.
2. A colon signals and emphasizes a comment or explanation that follows.
3. A colon shows that long quotation is coming.
4. After a greeting in a business letter.

This website also has links to instructions on many grammar subjects and punctuation.

Grammar Post

In writing my rough drafts for English 2010 I have caught myself making the same mistake at least half of the time. I usually include the author of a work toward the begining of my posts. As I type I find myself referring to the author by several different titles and their full name, last name, and first name. I have had some feedback that this makes my writing hard to follow because it is not always clear who I am talking about. In writing my papers, where there are several authors or works, I find myself getting confused. The easy way to fix this is to always refer to the author the same way. I now always use the author's last name or the title author. Dartmouth's websight lists this as one of their top 20 common grammar mistakes. To see this and the other 19 and solutions here is the website.

www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/ac_paper/grammar.shtml

I'm Black, You're White, Who's Innocent

Shelby Steel's writing I'm Black, You're White, Who's Innocent? Was not one of my favorite reads. It seems that Steel is too close to this issue to be objective. The writing would have been more effective if it was written more like a scholarly work and not as a narrative. Steel's constant use of phrases like "I think" and "I believe" detract from the work and constantly remind us that it is based mostly in Steel's opinions and personal experiences. While these would be powerful in a different format, they weren't here. Race is a complicated issue that has existed forever. In my travels I have noticed drastically different opinions of race and different levels of racism based on geographical locations. I lived in southern Georgia on and off for 6 years during my military career. Georgia was a shock to the system after growing up in St. George. I think there were probably 20 kids out of 350, I'm guessing, who were a race other than white, and race was never an issue. When I moved to Georgia at age 17 I learned that race is still a big issue in some places. It is not just limited to the United States however. As Americans we tend to look at our "American" society and discount others. I have been to 27 countries and some are as "racist" as can be and in some countries I didn't see any evidence of racism. We also tend to think of racism in the US as White, African American, Hispanic etc. There are countless races across the globe and many discriminate against others. It is not just an American phenomenon or problem. The prevalence of racism throughout the globe for as far back as history is recorded suggests that race is a complicated issue, and one not easily explained or solved. The United States has made great progress in treating all people fairly with regard to race. I think as a country we have arrived at equality, and in some cases have maybe overcompensated. Sadly small pockets of our society however, continue to harbor racism, and I believe they always will to some extent.

Grammar Post

I made a mistake this week when I ment to type write and instead I typed right. I sometimes have a problem with the right spelling of a word that sounds the same but is spelled different and has a different meaning. Some of the ones I have to double check sometimes:

rite, right, write

sight, site

to and too.

One of the tools I have learned to use to make sure I am using the right form of a word is a thesaurus. The auto thesaurus in word processing programs helps, but if there is still a question a printed or online thesaurus can help a lot. There is a good one at:

http://thesaurus.reference.com/

Killer Culture

David Kupelian's Killer Culture. Wow. Kupelian starts out talking about some basic rebelious behaviors. Different ways teens dress and talk. The type of music and culture teens are exposed to including rap, hip-hop, and MTV. The writing builds to a climax of terror and hoplessness as Kupelian describes teens who actively try to get aids and who hang from celings by hooks poked through their flesh. I don't understand what the big suprise is. There have always been a small number of wierd crazy people on the planet, I'm talking about people who hang from meathooks and get AIDS on purpose. We have also always had serial killers, rapists, murderers, adulterers, and people who abuse children. These are all terrible things, but things that have existed since recorded history began. I see the argument that modern media can reach more people and make some undesirable behaviors, fashion, and rebelion seem mainstream and in some cases it does, but Kupelian's solution is laughable. Kupelian suggests creating a "new" culture for our children by homeschooling them and sheltering them from all of the bad things in the world. What the heck does he think will happen when the kids turn 18 and move out of their protective bubble? God forbid they wear baggy pants or get their belly button pierced!!! The world might end. I agree, in part, that sometimes the media goes to far, but I totally disagree with Kupelian's solution. Children need to be taught to be virtuas, couragious, moral, and honest with themselves and others. How can we truly teach them those qualities by sheltering them from the world they will eventually live in. In my opinion segregating kids from the outside world teaches them only to run away, to be ashamed of thier beliefs and to fear people who are different than them. It doesn't teach them how to stand tall and stand up for what they believe in. It teaches them to hide and fear.

Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt

Jean Kilbourne uses statistics, emotional and rational apeals to convince us of her point of view. The issue of "sex" in advertizing has been a contriversial one for a very long time. Kilbourne blames advertisers and their adds for exploiting women and encouraging violence towards women. I agree with Kilbourne that some adds, including some she cited, go too far in implying or showing violence including condoning or encouraging rape. The problem is where to draw the line. It is easy to say we don't want to se that in an add, but very hard to draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not. For instance, if "violence" is banned in all advertisement it would negatively impact several industries. Examples would be mixed martial arts tournements, weapons manufacturers, movie companies, all olimpic sporting events that could be considered violent and many others. Also, who gets to define what constitutes "violence" in an add. Obviously pointing a gun at a woman, as in on of Kilbourne's examples, is bad and violent, but what about an add for a bow designed for deer hunting? Or an add showing a woman fending off an attacker with mace? The problem is once we start regulating things it is hard to stop and eventualy it could lead to bigger problems.

That being said, I was upset by some of the adds in Kilbourne's writing. I don't think it is something that the law or government needs to regulate except in extremely obvious cases. If a company steps to far out of bounds with their advertisements their products and brand will most likely suffer from the backlash. A lot of the examples Kilbourne used were adds for products that are, by nature, linked with sex and violent behavior. Provocative perfume, underware, and alcohol were the main sources of her advertizing examples. This does not, to me, represent a problem with the entire advertising world. I also don't believe that adds have the dramatic impact on peoples violent actions that Kilbourne does. I have been to countries that don't allow women to show their bodies or faces in public. They wear robes everywhere and hide their bodies to protect their chastity. Advertisements in these countries are not allowed to show women's bodies or faces either, yet there are very high rates of rape, murder, physical, mental, and emotional abuses against women. I think adds are a reflection of our popular culture not a driver. Sure they can help to usher in new fashions etc. But I wouldn't go as far as to say they incite people to violence who wouldn't have been violent anyway. The video game industry is one that has been attacked for encouraging violence. There have been several studdies, but I haven't yet seen one that proves violent video games lead kids to be more violent.

Grammar Post

One of the problems I have had in the past is the use of semicolons. My last english teacher said don't use them; that helped for a while. But, I like the semicolon. Here are some times when you can use one:

To link two independant clauses.

Link lists where the items in the list include commas.

To link lengthy clauses or clauses with commas.

There are some examples at the website:

www.writing.wisc.edu/handbook/semicolons.html

Framing Class...

I agree with much of what Diana Kendall wrote in "Framing Class, Vicarious Living, and Conspicuous Consumption", but I think it is only applicable to certain groups of people. Kendall claims American's are overly influenced by the media. To some extent I agree. There are a lot of ways in which the media influences us. I don't agree with Kendall to the extent we are influenced by the media. There are some people out there who may get their ideas about social classes and what products they should purchase or consume soley from the media. I think most, however, get those ideas from the people around them and their real life experiences more than from the media alone. People might view what happens in the media through their own looking glass and be swayed, but it is not nessessarily the media's fault. I think the biggest problem with media in America is that American's spend way to much time watching, absorbing and being entertained by it. As a society we are forgetting how to spend and enjoy time with eachother and with ourselves and that is a problem.

Serving in Florida

Barbara Ehrenreich's story "Serving in Florida" didn't hold my attention very well. I have read several stories and writings from middle and upper class people who attempt to join the working class as a social experiment or for personal exploration. It seems that the majority, like Barbara, don't believe in the American dream once they are through. Some though have started with nothing at a minimum wage job and worked their way up. I can't remember the name of the book, but a college grad left home with nothing then wrote a book about his experiences over the course of the year. I'll find the name of the book and author and add it here. His experience showed that it is possible to get ahead and make something out of nothing. I think a big part of the reason people get stuck working 2 minimum wage jobs forever is what Barbara mentions several times. She is so involved in trying to survive her 10-12 hour days that she stops actively thinking. I believe that it is still possible to move up the social and economic ladder in our country. The thing is it takes work and effort and dedication. You can't just get comfortable where you are and not do anything to make your situation better if you want more money.

I Just Wanna Be Average

Mike Rose's story "I Just Wanna Be Average" was interesting. I wasn't sure if I was going to like Rose's story after the first bit. He sounded maybe just a little too jaded to talk objectively. After finishing the story I am a fan. "I Just Wanna Be Average" continues the educational theme of our last few readings. The main point is that there is something wrong with our educational system in America. I agree with this opinion. It is a complicated issue and we have read several different points of view on what these authors think the problems are. I very much enjoyed reading Gatto and Rose's take on the issue. I am still of the opinion that personal responsibility rules. It is not the governments job to make you want to succeed and learn. Those who don't want to make the effort, do the work, and motivate themselves need to be allowed to fail. Others will learn from their example and succeed. That being said, Rose made a good point. At one point in his story he mentioned that people will "float" up to the mark you set for them. Rose also says he felt like he was floating in a shallow pool. The point being that people perform better when more is expected of them. I have seen this in my own lives and in the lives of people around me. I enjoyed reading about the teacher Rose had who helped put him on the right path, who taught him how to succeed and enjoy learning. I think most of us have had great teachers here and there who have influenced our lives for the better.

Our countries education system is very complex. I get the feeling that most of the people in it don't even know how it works. We can work to improve it, but it could take forever. What we can do right now is take responsibility for ourselves and our kids. We need to learn to motivate ourselves, get our own attention, and teach ourselves to enjoy learning and succeeding. Then we will have to tools to help teach our children how to work within the system, utilizing personal responsibility and self motivation, to learn and succeed.

Against School

I enjoyed reading John Taylor Gatto's "Against School". I hated my first 12 years of school. I mean, I liked my friends, and lunch, and the clubs and activities, but I hated school. My parents expected me to get at least B's in every class and that's what my goal was. Grades were what mattered, not learning the material. I probably devoted 10% of my thinking capacity to school and that was enough to do well. Based on my experiences I agree with Gatto on several points.

I agree that school tries to make us all the same. There isn't much room for a particularly bright kid to progress faster than an average learner. Classes move at the same speed and cover the same material for everyone. In my experience this means that hardly anyone learns anything useful in the first 12 years of school. Oh we do learn some things as Gatto points out. We learn how to blindly follow our teachers and leaders, we learn how to force ourselves to do boring, useless, mundane work well. We learn not to question anything, whether it's the system, the teachers, or the material.

I didn't go to college after high school. My grades were good enough, I had a 3.3 GPA in high school even though I hardly put any effort into my studies. I didn't go to college because I did not like school. When I was 17 I graduated high school and joined the military to get as far away from school as possible. It was a great experience that, surprisingly, actually taught me to think for myself, to question systems, information, and norms. Now I'm in college after 9 years of no school. I have been pleasantly surprised so far. The vast majority of my classes have encouraged actual thinking! Amazing! I am taking the time to learn about subjects that are interesting to me and I am enjoying myself. I think the key difference though is my experiences between High School and College. I take personal responsibility for my education now. I don't just wait for someone to get me interested or get my attention. I grab my own attention and foster my own interest in subjects and learning.

Overall I think the big problem with our educational system is personal responsibility. Parents need to be involved in their children's life and education. Kids, under the guidance of their parents, need to motivate and entertain themselves. I agree with Gatto that the system is set up to control, limit and cow American students. But the blame does not fall on some mysterious "education system". We are all taxpayers and voters. If we "really" wanted to change the education system we could. What we can do is learn to work within the system, and that is the responsibility of the parents and the individual students.

Idiot Nation

Michael Moore's piece titled "Idiot Nation" fails to qualify as anything close to academic writing. Not one of Moore's facts or statistics is backed by any evidence other than Moore's personal opinions or his recollections of past events or readings. Moore does make a couple of good points, but they are lost because of his broad use of generalizations and lack of any first hand evidence or reliable statistics.
I agree with Moore that our school systems are under funded, that our students aren't learning and retaining enough information, and that teachers are underpaid for their contributions to our country. There is also another problem with our education in America which Moore makes very clear in his writing even though he does not recognize or acknowledge it himself. This problem is that some students in the education system are not trying to learn anything! Moore is a perfect example of the lack of personal responsibility among some American students. Moore explains his feelings and experiences with regard to his education at some length in "Idiot Nation". Throughout his entire educational experience Moore gives examples of how he doesn't care, doesn't try, and openly despises the teachers who were trying to teach him. Moore also criticizes President Bush for making a joke about his C grades when speaking to a graduating class at Yale, then goes on to tell us that he dropped out of college all together because he couldn't find a parking space! Who is the idiot? The one who makes it through with C grades or the one who quits because he isn't early enough to find a parking space? Moore, like other American students, experience poor results within our educational system primarily because they don't try, they fight the system instead of learning to learn within it. Sure there are things that could be changed for the better, but our educational system works for those who try. The move in our country away from personal responsibility to responsibility of the state troubles me.

I could write at length about educational funding, but I'll keep it short. The United States Government doesn't fund or pay for anything! Taxpayers give the government its money and the government spends the taxpayers money. The money is not limitless. We have to balance our national security, education, social programs and other concerns within our budget. We need more money for education, but Moore makes it sound like the politicians are simply unwilling to write the check. The problem is not unwillingness. Education is one of the most popular issues as politicians run for election and re-election. By and large most politicians would love to give more funding to education. The problem is that they would have to pull it from other programs or raise taxes and the American voter is not always willing to make sacrifices in other areas.

I don't believe Moore's writing here can be taken seriously. He is talking about a very complex subject without citing any solid facts, sources, or statistics.

Grammar Post

One of the problems that I have had, and continue to have, is the proper use of commas in writing. Sometimes I get carried away and add to many. I improved my knowlege of commas in English 1010 last semester and am more conciouse of it now. I read everyday for fun. Usually historical fiction novels. Since English 1010 I have been paying more attention to the writing and grammar in my favorite books. This has helped me to gain a better understanding of commas.

Changing American Families

I thought Judy Root Aulette's writing "Changing American Families" was interesting. In particular I was interested in the apparent differences between family units of different economic classes. The practice of the "Upper Class" in America of marrying within their class interested me for two reasons. The first is that historically marriages were arranged to maintain or advance economic and social status in all but the lowest economic classes. According to this writing the middle class is not as concerned with marrying within their economic class as I have learned they were in the past. The second reason I thought this was interesting is because people in the "Upper Classes" seem to spend a lot of time and energy, according to Aulette, maintaining their positions. It makes sense then that marrying into a family of equal or greater status and wealth would be an important consideration. Also interesting was the statement that upper class families train their children to maintain the family fortune by never spending the money they receive. They only use the interest from the family nest egg.

The reading also mentioned that middle class families were the most likely to relocate for work. Because of this most of the research showed that extended family was not a big factor when planning these relocations. Another interesting point on the middle class was that they replace some of these family ties with friendships and other organizations and associations. Families below the middle class line seem to be much more reliant on their extended families for success and survival. I found it interesting that the "upper class" and lower class tended to have more in common with each other from a family perspective than with the middle class.

What We Really Miss bout the 1950s

"What We Really Miss About the 1950s" is an excerpt from one of Stephanie Coontz's works titled "The Way We Really Are: Coming to Terms with America's Changing Families". In this excerpt Coontz explores the ideas and circumstances that usually place the 1950s as one of the best decades for families in the United States. Many things influence our romantic view of the 1950's. Popular culture including TV programs that showed the "ideal" American family were a powerful force in shaping peoples opinion of what the perfect family was. The economic and social situations of the 1950s allowed time for reflection and focus on the family. There were growths in our industry and economy that created jobs. After World War II many young couples started to marry and have children. A majority of women spent their time raising and caring for their families and homes and many Fathers were the families breadwinners again. This would eventually lead to tension as many women desired to return to the work force, but throughout most of the 50s family roles were well defined. This allowed parents to spend more time with their children than in previous decades. Homes were affordable and most Americans sought home ownership. All of these factors contribute to our idealistic view of the 1950's. However, despite all of the good of this period there were still huge problems.

Racism was rampant in the 1950s and many Americans felt excluded from the "white" society of the time. Race and gender issues would come to a head in later especially as the economy begins to decline. I believe that as humans we tend to look at the past through foggy glass. We think of past times as good or bad. Generally speaking people look back and the 1950s fondly and tend to remember only the good parts. We have done this with other periods in our history. Pirates of the 1700s for example have been romanticized and popularized in our culture. In fact the time periods in which piracy was widespread were some of the dark and desperate times in our history. All things considered though, the 1950s seems to have had a good balance of factors that may have made it a good time to live in and grow up in. Families spent more time together, the economy was improving, the war was over and the cold war had yet to come, and Americans were working hard to establish the sort of culture and families we wanted to have.