Women in History

AiS this past year

Finals are halfway done, schools out in less than a week, and summer is fast approaching. As I look back on this crazy class I've come to realize that the "correct" way of learning isn't always the right way to learn. From the moment we got "The Death of Mr. Bolos" assignment I thought I was doomed. I'm not the kind of person who usually enjoys discussions or loose curriculums. So I automatically thought that I would get nothing out of this class and would not learn a thing. How wrong I was. This class has taught me that sometimes the facts your reading are not the only things out there. You have to look beyond whats on the page and focus on things such as, why are we reading about this, who wrote this, how much space is dedicated to this, and so on. Also, throughout this past year I have made so many connections from my everyday life to topics we have talked about in AIS. Although I'm not very good at blogging what I've seen, they are definitely circulating in my mind. I'm positive that I will continue to look for those connectors long after our last day of class. But I think the most important thing to take out of this class was the fact that I had to break out of my little comfortable shell. It's intimidating walking into a classroom with 40 other people who all have their different opinions and methods of thinking. At least in my case, raising my hand was an accomplishment on its own. Yet, I like to think my participation has improved over the past year and I will continue to reach my hand out a little further every day from now on. I guess all I have to say is thanks Mr. Bolos and Mr. O'Connor. It's been a fun and exciting year. 

Yo check it...

So I found this on the front page of cnn today:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/conditions/05/07miraculous.memory/index.html

For more information check out my other two blogs on this.

So Junior Theme is still going and its never ending. However, I've finished one part of the research criteria which is ann interview. Over e-mail, I had the opportunity to ask John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, a few questions about the U.S. government's foreign aid policy. Some of his answers to my questions were really surprising. You could tell how passionate he was and how much he cares about our country and future generations. Here are a couple of the questions I asked: (bold is Mr. Perkins)



The United States claims that one of the reasons for giving foreign aid is to combat terrorism. Do you think that giving money to countries like Colombia, Pakistan, and Iraq really achieves this goal? Why?

No, it encourages terrorism which only exists on a significant scale because people are impoverished, exploited and desperate. Violence begets violence. The money ought to go toward helping the poor get better lives. That's the way to combat terrorism.

Why is there such a difference between foreign spending in the Middle East while underdeveloped countries in Africa desperately need money? Isn't one of the goals of foreign aid to reduce poverty?

Unfortunately foreign aid is about exploiting and helping the multinationals, not reducing poverty. People like you and the rest of your generation will suffer terribly from this, as it creates an unstable, unbalanced and desperate world. You and I must work to change this terrible situation.


I'm really excited to incoorperated these and the other questions into my junior theme.

Coincidence..I think not

I was watching 60 minutes today and one of the top headlines was a story about the US and world economy. Basically it was talking about how countries are pouring money into our economy to help major corporations because of our current recession. Countries like China, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi are investing billions of dollars in shares of companies such as Citigroup and other "mega banks".

This, as 60 minutes put it, "has raised troubling questions: are these mostly undemocratic regimes saving Wall Street … or invading it?"

Now doesn't this sound familiar??

If you read my last post you would have noticed that US corporations have been throwing money into underdeveloped countries and getting oil, UN votes, etc from that.

It seems as though the US is afraid they are going to be in the same cruddy boat they built for other countries.

One of the biggest worries for the US is China. China has trillions of dollars to spend and lately have been focusing their attention on the United States. Economist Peter Navarro explained "China’s pattern of behavior: its unfair trade practices, currency manipulation, technology espionage, and a refusal to crack down on counterfeiting." This seems really scary but it's hard to dismiss the fact that this is what the United States has been doing for years.

Coincidence..I think not

Junoir Theme

As Spring Break is sadly coming to a close our class is finally starting Junior Theme. I know that I want to base my topic off the book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man but I don't know how to narrow that down. I think I'm going to do something about corporations and how they are corrupt. I talked to Mr. Bolos and he suggested to forcus on places such as the United Fruit Company or the World Bank. But the problem with that is that I want to talk about the United State's role in all of this. It's kinda sneaky how they cheat countries out of billions of dollars without directly doing anything at all. If you look at previous blog you'll be able to kinda see what I'm talking about.

Economic What?

I've just finished reading John Perkin's book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man and to tell you the truth I'm a little disturbed.

The book "is not fiction. It is the true story of my [Perkin's] life" (xii). Perkins tell the story of his as an economic consultant and what he calls himself as an "economic hit man"

But what exactly is that?

In his own words:

"Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars [...] Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as Empire but one that has taken on terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization" (xi).

To sum that up EHMs go to undeveloped countries and get their political and financial leaders to accept huge loans from the United States in order to aid their countries by developing infrastructure such as power plants or roads. However, the loans are so big that the countries are never able to pay them back and instead have to offer the US a form of payment that includes control over United Nations votes, installing military bases, or access to resources like oil.

This small detail of an EHM's job reminded me of some of our class' Reconstruction ideas today. As a way to help the South, the North would give them money so that they could, like what our country is doing today, build infrastructure that was needed. As a way of payment, the South would give the North cotton, tobacco, and whatever else they might have been able to give.

While this seems like a good plan, the results are usually not what they seem. In most countries "Economic Hit Men" invade poverty levels shoot up as well as unemployment and public debt. At the same time, the countries national resources that were available to the people decrease leaving them with very little to survive on.

After looking at this, would that Reconstruction have worked? Would the South fall into great deficits? Could that have been another incentive to rebel? These are all questions that can never be answered but it's a different perspective that even though a plan might seem really good, when acted out the results may exceed all your previous expectations.

If you want to learn more about Confessions of an Economic Hit Man or about John Perkins visit http://www.johnperkins.org/

Clothes and Slavery

One of my favorite blogs (outside of our AIS class) is facehunter. If you want to see what it is here's the link.

Basically, facehunter is "a man out and about in london and beyond: eye candy for the style hungry" As sketchy as that sounds, the blog is really cool and you get to see outfits and crazy fashions that practically no one in the United States would ever think of wearing. I'm pretty sure Tyra Banks would classify the clothes as "High Fashion" but when you look closely, most of the clothes are stuff that you or I would have in our closets, however, its the way these people put them together is what makes them unique.

So this is my question:

Is the way we dress a form of expressing what we really feel? Can we really read a person by what they wear?

In my opinion, it's like judging a book by it's cover. It is almost like seeing a person with a tee-shirt for a dress and saying "Wow. They must own no pants. They probably don't have a very good job" What?! How can you make an assumption like that based on a tee-shirt? Unfortunately this happens quite often and I know that I too have been guilty of judging a person by what they are wearing. The interesting connection between this and what our class has been learning is that this is exactly how Blacks were viewed pre and post Civil War America. People only looked at a person's skin and automatically made assumptions about them based on a tiny little factor. We shouldn't worry about a person's skin the same way we shouldn't worry about what a person is wearing. The goal is for everyone one of us to look past a person's exterior and see what they are really like. You might be surprised.

Idle hands...the Devils Workshop?

"Idle hands are the devil's workshop"

Although we discussed this a few weeks ago in class, I recently came across an article in the New York Time's Sports Magazine that brought up the very idea. Although it was encrypted in the article it was there nevertheless. But back to the article.

Basically, the story is about two sisters who are becoming the "Venus and Serena" of golf. The girls, Ginger, 13, and Robbi, 12, are making their mark in the world of amateur golf. However, maintaining that status takes a lot of time and effort.

The girls are home-schooled by their mother and follow a strict four-hour-a-day study period. Now, this didn't seem that important until I read why their mom likes keeping the girls at home (besides having more time to play golf):

"I appreciate that they don't have much socialization now. What they were getting in school was not that good. Parents give their kids too much freedom today. We don't allow much freedom. Their friendships are monitored."

Woah. What? How can you monitor friendships? Isn't the point of growing up branching out and seeing the world for yourself?

Now just to be clear I'm not saying that home-schooling is bad or that it is the wrong way to raise a child. In fact, I believe that every parent is entitled to raise their children the way they want to. But at 12 and 13 I personally think that giving kids some freedoms will allow them to mature in way that parents could never teach on their own.

Another quote, again coming from the mom, that stood out was "My girls are their true age. They're virtuous girls"

I know that we have had discussions in class that have evolved around kids and their ages but thats not what stood out. In my mind I was wondering "What in the world does virtuous mean?" Heres what dictionary.com says:

Virtuous:

-adjective

1. conforming to moral and ethical principles; morally excellent; upright

2. chaste

Basically it means her children are pure, morally correct human beings.

Personally, I don't think that I have ever met someone completely virtuous. And to call a 12 or 13 year old either means that parents hold their kids on a very tight leash or that moms don't see everything their kids do. I personally don't think it is possible to be morally excellent when you spend everyday of your life with your sister who is a year apart from you. For me, there would be no way.
But between chores, 4 hour long study periods, 7 hour long golf games, weight lifting/body work, and the countless hours spent in the car, there is not a lot of room for free time. At the moment these girls seem to be excelling with their schedule. But my question is not the present but in the future, when they are in their teens and their priorities begin to change. Could this hectic schedule actually be the "devil's workshop"?

I guess we'll find out.

If you want to read the article you can find it at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/sports/playmagazine/02play-daddy.html

Oh the Memories

I was going through CNN's website and came across an article that seemed really familiar to one of my previous blogs.

It's basically about a man named Brad Williams who can recall the smallest details of his life. His specialty is dates. Ask his what happened on a certain date and he will be able to tell you what he did. In fact, if you compare my last memory blog to the article you'll be able to see numerous similarities. They both mention A.J., a women whose memory competes with Williams and her experiences. However, she says that her memory is a burden, with memories flashing in and out like an unedited movie while Williams says that he "never really had reason to think I wasn't like everyone else." So the question remains: why is all this information there?

We know basically where memories are stored and how they are retrieved but we've never known why. Maybe its part of the way we've evolved. If everyone were like goldfish then every three seconds we would have to relearn our lives. I don't think that's possible. However, we have a glimpse of what could happen. Seeing people with Alzheimer's disease is an example of someone who is losing their memory but may physically still be okay. Although its not as instantaneous as a goldfish, we see that humans cannot function without some kind of memory. Is that why we remember? I guess the only way to find out is to learn about people like A.J. or Williams and continue to try to understand the brain and unlock some of its secrets.

If the link didn't work then here's the website:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/02/22/memory.man.ap/index.html

You've Come a Long Way Response

Responding to Bolos' blog on the Virginia Slim cigarette ads, I think its really interesting how the cigarette company linked smoking to women's rights. They're basically saying that women were not even allowed to, god forbid, smoke in front of men without being punished in some way. But now that women can vote and do what they please, they can smoke in front of "formally dominate men" and even smoke special cigarettes made just for women.  In my personal opinion I think smoking is not the smartest choice one could make but after seeing these ads I could see why women would jump on these in a heartbeat. We've all hear the saying "Stick it to the man" and that is exactly what these ads are asking women to do. Show those stupid men whose boss and smoke when you want to, where you want to, and with whom you want to. 

Also, Bolos also asked the question wondering if we remember cigarette billboards near schools or on T.V. My answer is yes. I remember driving down the highway with looking at all the smoking ads showing all-American cowboys looking glamorous while taking a puff from a cigarette. But one story that probably hit me the most was the one my dad told me. When he was young cigarette companies basically had no limits on advertising. When he was a young boy he used to go into a drug store and by his father's cigarettes without ever needing a parent with him. Besides that, a way to encourage kids to smoke was to sell a single cigarette for only a penny so that way they didn't have to spend a lot of money on an entire pack. If tobacco companies did not have the restrictions that they do today how do you think they would be advertising?

Does Anyone want to change their mind??

Today in class Mr. Bolos was talking about the World Question of 2008. This was "What have you changed your mind about? Why? (A link to the website if right here)
There are some of the answers:

"opposites do not attract"
-David G. Myers (Social psychologist)

"I Used To Think I Could Change My Mind"
-Antony Garrett Lisi (Independent Theoretical Physicist)

"I have changed my mind about technology [...] technology? Hey, it's not so bad"
-Seth Lloyd (Quantum Mechanical Engineer)

"The Death of the Dinosaurs"
-Scott Sampson (Chief Curator, Utah Museum of Natural History)

That's a lot of answers from a lot of different people. There were many others all giving their thoughts which were all completely different.



But the question remains to every single person. What did you change your mind about??


The first time Mr. Bolos asked that the thing that popped in my head was "I dunno." It's really hard to think about that kind of stuff. Most of the people who answered those questions did something related to the thing that they changed their mind about. But as a high school student learning tons of different subjects all at once its hard for me to pinpoint exactly what I want to think about. Sure, I've learned a lot of stuff, but out of all that material, what have I changed my mind about??

Suddenly it hit me like a ton of bricks.

I've changed my mind about school. Before I thought that all the stuff we were learning was useless information that we just filed away to never use again. Instead, I've decided that everything we have ever learned can be taken out of that file and used to help us understand our lives better.

For example, I thought that knowing French was ridiculous. The only reason I took it was to impress my parents and have another thing to put on my college applications. But as I learned more and more I began to notice that my English class was becoming easier as well. I started to take the French grammar and use it to my advantage in English. That was extremely nice because I actually got grades in both those classes. Even today I catch myself thinking "Now how would I do this in French?"

But enough about me. Going back to the original question what have you changed your mind about???

Citizen Soldier

After discussing the video Citizen
Soldier in class today I replayed it several times. To
respond to Mr.O'Connor's blog I think that the target audience of the
video was people ages 17-25. These are people who are young, fit, and
probably have an education. Unlike the army, which is basically a full
time thing, the National Guard is only a once-a-weekend commitment
which gives you more time to focus on your studies. The "hero's" in the
video are young, white men that are portrayed in the revolutionary war,
World War II, and 9/11. There is one African-American woman and the
only man over the age of 40 is the higher ranking officer giving the woman a medal.

Besides the actual people in the video who knew that war was so glorious? Not
one person is showed dying and even when the British soldiers are being
shot at you don't see one person falling down. Isn't that beating
around the bush? Even during the D-Day scene, where in reality hundreds
of Americans lost their lives, not one person is killed. The National
Guard, in my opinion, do a very good job at hiding the bad things about
war and only showing the positive heroic sides of it. If war really
looked like what I saw in that video then I would defiantly sign up. No
blood, no dying, lots of people loving year, earning a medal or two,
then why not? However, you have to look at both sides of what the
National Guard is trying to show. Even if that means having to face the
fact that there is a war going on and that people are dying every
single day from it. I think that people have to really look at these
types of music videos and realize that not everything you see on screen
will really come true.

Jolly Holiday?

Are the holiday seasons all they're cracked up to be??



The whole point of the holidays is to send quality loving time with your family and friends but as far as I'm concerned the only thing I'm doing is worrying about school and, of course, what the heck I'm going to get each person for Chistmahanukwanzica. Seriously, the holidays have become so focused on material goods that we sometimes forget why we really celebrate them. Sure, presents are nice and its always fun seeing your sister open the 100 page princess coloring book you gave her, but whats the point of them?? I have no idea how Santa and Christianity fit in and don't get me started about Hanukkah. I know people who do not celebrate religious holidays in December but still find the time to hang up stockings or give each other presents. What gives? Is this what the holidays have come to? What about peace on earth and good will to men? How about we stop, look at ourselves, and slow down for once to actually spend time with our family and friends and enjoy each others company. That is what I think the holidays are about.