Welcome!

Welcome to the weblog for our American Literature class. Here's the place we will be continuing conversations from class and starting new ones. We'll be discussing and debating current events, historical controversies, and literary conundrums. We might even see a little poetry.

So, what's a blog? And how will we be using it class? For information on blogging and how to join and post to our blog, see "All About Blogging."

We're looking forward to a great year.

Make sure you check your e-mail for your invitation to join the blog. Also – and this is very important – the first step you should take after you accept the invitation is to edit your user profile so that you control how your identity and your communication preferences.  Click on the pull-down menu next to your name in the upper right corner of the browser and click on “Blogger Profile.” Then click on “Edit Profile.”

You can fill out as much of it as you want, but the only requirement is -- under “Identity” -- make sure your “Display name” is your first name and last initial only -- so we provide some anonymity while still allowing your classmates and teacher to be able to identity who you are. For example, change “Bernie Heidkamp” to “Bernie H.”

No Such Thing as an Illegal Person

Immigration is an extremely hot topic these days, and with candidates such as Donald Trump taking such an extreme stance on one side of the issue or the other, people don't seem to have a clear consensus as to what we should do about the issue of immigration and illegal immigrants. Let me start off by saying that illegal immigrants are actually an extremely integral part of our economy, with them helping pay for social security as well as growing a very large portion of produce and making up a large part of work forces overall. Because Trump's immigration plan seems to be the leading plan right now (I'm shuddering just thinking about a Trump presidency), let's just take a look at what would happen. 11 million workers would disappear. Our real GDP would take a $1.6 trillion hit, and it would take 20 years to completely remove all illegal immigrants. The price of strawberries, bananas, and any other farm-produced products would skyrocket, as well as farm income dropping severely. Not to mention how illegal immigrants actually create jobs that often go to U.S. natives. Though it may seem a bit paradoxical due to the wording, illegal immigrants play an extremely crucial part in our nation's economy. Thus, though it may make plenty of people angry, the most beneficial and easy solution to this "problem" is to provide citizenship to these immigrants. Putting them on the record would make them legal workers, eliminating all the scares created by raiding factories and trying to find illegals, as well as keeping the benefits of these workers being here.

Immigration

Immigration is a major issue in the United States. Some presidential candidates feel that immigrants should be deported, banned, and blocked from coming to the United States. Other candidates have different approaches to the situation. There are many ways that the US immigration policy can approach this situation.

Although immigration is a huge problem to these candidates, the methods in decreasing immigration should not be as dramatic. Immigrants that are already in the United States should not be the main focus right now. The US immigration policy should focus on keeping more immigrants from coming to the United States. Security at the border should be increased to ensure that no immigrants will pass through illegally. For undocumented immigrants, they should be given a year to become citizens of the United States and prove citizenship.

All Muslims should not be discriminated against. Every Muslim does not have the intentions of harming the US and its citizens. Unless suspicious activity is suspected, Muslims should be left alone. They should be treated as equal as every other American citizen. The US immigration policy should include that all Muslims must be documented in order to stay or come to the United States. 

The Issue of Immigration

The topic of immigration is diverse issue that brings out many of American’s fears, racism, and xenophobia. This is especially apparent in Trump’s rhetoric throughout the campaign. Concerning illegal immigration, Trump believes that there should be a wall that separates the US and Mexican border. This idea is simply absurd. The wall is estimated to cost 8 billion dollars and probably couldn’t be built because of varying terrain. Similarly absurd is Trump’s assertion to ban anymore Muslims from entering the country. All Trump is doing is appealing to the fears and emotions that many American citizens hold.

It is important to remember some of the values of that the US claims to hold, these values would be the ideals of freedom and liberty. Candidates like Trump are dividing the country and forgetting these beliefs. Instead of deporting 11 million illegal immigrants, there should be comprehensive immigration reform. I applaud Obama’s use of executive orders to aid illegal immigrants when the Congress could not reach a decision. Many illegal immigrants who contribute to society live in fear of deportation. Illegal immigrants who entered the country when they were very young only know America as their home. America’s goal should be to find a path to citizenship for hardworking illegal immigrants that are in the country right now. Policies such as DACA or deferred action may grant periodic safeguard from deportation, but it does not lead to a direct path to citizenship. For hard working illegal immigrants who positively contribute to society, there should be a path to citizenship so that they do not have to live in fear of deportation. Instead of deporting those who contribute to society, the government should focus on deporting criminals who affect the safety of the country.

It is also important to address the issue of refugees from Middle East. According to Trump, Muslims should be banned from entering the nation. This assertion is offensive and only creates more damage both at home and abroad. In the nation, this prejudice only causes cultural divides. More assertions like this will also only offend Middle Eastern nations and strains relations. Instead we should welcome refugees, as they are fleeing from rampant violence and their homes have been obliterated by terrorist groups such as ISIS. Of course it is important to keep our country safe. Instead of banning anymore refugees who probably have no ties to terrorism, we should work on bolstering intelligence and dismantling terrorist group’s use of social media to recruit members at home. Overall, the US should work to welcome immigrants rather than turning its head. The US is seen as a bastion of freedom and liberty, and should continue to be seen in this way.

Reestablishing the American Dream

For over half a century, the United States has been the country with the highest international migrant population in the world.  As of 2013, there are over 45 million immigrants living in America (14.3% of the population).  In addition to those 45 million, there are approximately 11.3 million unauthorized immigrants living in the United States.  Because of this, there is an ongoing debate in America over immigration policies. This debate predominantly focuses on illegal immigrants from Mexico, of which there are 5.6 million living in the U.S. as of 2014 (49% of illegal immigrants).  

Immigration has been especially pertinent in the 2016 presidential election.  Some candidates take firm stances that denounce the current standing of immigration policy in the U.S. and look to decrease our immigrant population drastically while other candidates want to help the millions of immigrants living in our country by granting them some form of citizenship.  In my eyes, given the current immigrant population of the U.S. it would be too difficult and messy to deport all the illegal immigrants in the United States.  A possible solution would be to allow unauthorized immigrants currently working in the U.S. to be given a work visa that allows them to stay in the country as long as they have a stable job, and could even be upgraded to full citizenship in the long-run.  This would create stability in many families that rely on a family member who is in the U.S. illegally.  Most importantly, it would reestablish the American dream for all the people that want to live in o great country. 

Hasty Generalization: Trump v. Muslims

It is no secret that Donald Trump does not like some groups of people in America.  One of these groups are Muslims in America.  Throughout his presidential campaign, Trump has repeatedly voiced his dissatisfaction with American foreign policy towards Muslims.  Trump thinks that in order to "make America great again", we need to stop letting Muslims into the country for a variety illogical reasons.

Trump's islamophobia shows itself in his press release from December 7th, 2015.  Trump and his campaign officials claimed, "25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad" and 51% of those polled, "agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah."   It was later revealed that this poll was an online opt-in survey of only 600 Muslims.

Trump's use of this data represents a hasty generalization.  Trump surveyed a small population of Muslims and used this data to generalize the views of the population of Muslims in America.  To put this in perspective, a study done in 2014 shows that 0.9% of Americans are Muslim.  That means that there are around 3.3 million Muslims in America.  Of those 3.3 million, 600 were surveyed in an online pole.  The statistics presented by Trump in his press release do not adequately represent the views of the majority Muslims living in America, and should be considered a proper logic.
For Trump's Press Release Click Here

Satirical Impersonation of Sarah Palin by Tina Fey

Saturday Night Live is an American sketch comedy and variety show. After its debut in 1975, this show has been successful in American culture for over three decades. This success is largely due to effective cast members such as Tina Fey. In one particular episode, Fey and costar Amy Poehler impersonate politician Sarah Palin in an interview.

Aside from dresssing and talking like Sarah Palin to make fun of her, Tina Fey uses satire to make fun of Palin as a person and politician. When asked about her recent trip to New York, Fey as Palin mentions how her family went to a "goofy evolution museum" and how she had 30 false alarms because she thought she saw Osama bin Laden driving taxis. While American citizens are laughing, their opinions of Palin are being shifted negatively due to Fey's satirical impression of her.

Also mentioned in the interview was Palin's thoughts on foreign policy. Fey was able to make fun of Palin's political views on foreign policy in her mock interview with Poehler. When asked about her views on foreign policy, Fey as Palin would repeat questions into answers and not finish sentences. FOr example, when asked how she would specifically spread democracy, Fey answered, "Specifically we will spread democracy abroad to those who want it." This creates an opportunity to make Palin seem unknowledgeable on the topic of foreign policy. When Palin is given another opportunity to explain her claim of her expertise on foreign policy with respects to Alaska and Russia, Palin dumbfoundedly says that people in Alaska are only separated from Alaska by a mere boarder of the Atlantic Ocean. Here, Fey and Poehler are presenting Palin as an imbecile not only because she named the wrong ocean and finds it to be a "mere boarder," but Poehler's facial expressions and tone of voice also hint at the satire being portrayed.

While Fey and Poehler's intentions here were for mostly comic relief, the satire presented in this mock interview shapes American citizens to look at Palin differently when considering her ethos and how effective she would be in office.

Trump and Colbert's Intelligent Interview

Recently, on The Late Night Show, Donald Trump made an appearance to talk with Stephen Colbert. Within this wildly entertaining interview, Trump stated that he had no apologies for anyone, and he continued to elaborate on his wall plan and how it's practically flawless.

At the beginning of the interview, Colbert apologized to Trump for all the mean things that he said over the years, and then asked if Trump had anyone to apologize to, to which he said "Nope, not really. Unless you want me to apologize to the audience for no reason." He continues on to talk about the wall that will separate America from Mexico, and immediately the audience laughs. Trump is about to go off on the crowd until Colbert calms him down, saying "The crowd loves the wall, its a great idea, that's why they're happy." Trump is settled down by this, further reinforcing the idea that this politician is clueless. His ego is huge and he is obviously the center of the universe, and is too slow to understand that a good 80% of the population takes
him as a joke.

Stephen goes into the role of the Mexican senator as Trump attempted to explain how he would get Mexico to pay for the wall he plans on building. He speaks a bit of gibberish before Colbert breaks character and satirically suggests building two walls (Trump interrupts "And they're connected!"), with a moat (yet another interruption, "With a nice resort!") that's full of fire and fire-proof alligators. Trump takes a while to understand that he's being made fun of, but he eventually gets it then laughs it off because he can't truly get mad at a comedian on live TV.

This man is not fit to run our country, because all he knows how to do is follow his racist ambitions of a "pure" country, and only seeks his own personal profit. Saving money by attempting to force Mexico to build the wall for him, and presenting a "nice resort" for the jokingly presented suggestion of a moat between two walls on the border.

Is Donald Trump a joke?

Clown for President?

Why is it that people say that Donald trump is a clown or a joke? To some it is obvious, but to others he is a legit presidential candidate. As to why he is leading the polls, some marvel, but there are reasons. Not only does he have a loud mouth, that he loves running like a weed whacker on rocket fuel, but he also has Charisma. His flippy blond hair might not scream attractiveness, but his charm does have its way. He promises a brand new, fully functioning economy. He promises to make america great again, under his leadership. However, these are all blank promises, which he forms, using every buzz word in the book. Unfortunately, we are not in need of a Charisma driven leader like Trump, who will end up ruling for himself as he viciously climbs his way to the top. Stepping on who ever is in the way, charisma driven leaders often only work for themselves. Although he may drive the economy into a new healthy state, he will drive the rest of the country into the dirt.  

Is Donald Trump a joke? I would be hesitant to say yes; I see him as a smart businessman, who would be successful in building an economy, but has no idea how to run a country, especially the most powerful one in the world.

Truth and Death

    9/11 is one of the most important moments in recent American history. It started (or at least justified) a war, sparked worldwide controversy, and forever changed our cultural landscape. Songs, stories, poems, apologies, in a single afternoon millions of lives were changed, and thousands were silenced.

    People dance around the subject all too much in my opinion. It makes people uncomfortable and sometimes even ashamed, and if it makes them neither of those it makes them angry. So we use euphemisms and meaningless phrases such as "never forget", as if simply repeating it enough will cement it in history rather than whichever historian fate smiles upon.

    Let's look at some numbers. In relationship to war, 9/11 was practically nothing. More than a hundred times than many Americans died in Vietnam for no reason at all. Even as recent as Iraq, the death toll of American soldiers is 4,425, and they were sent over in the name of ending the death caused on that September day. Of course, if you look at the Iraqi casualties in that war, estimates range from 100,000 to 1 million. Strange how we don't talk about those as often.

    Still, there must be a difference between deaths in 9/11 and war casualties, right? War is often justified, and the destruction of the towers was a brutal and senseless act of violence. This argument holds up less and less the more I think about it. The fact is, war has killed millions upon millions upon millions of people, often for nearly meaningless reasons in retrospect. Do those who die at war feel any differently about it than those in the towers? I doubt it.

    So why are we so adamant to never forget? Why do the lives of those thousands weigh so heavily upon the American people? Maybe because for once, the brutal deaths aren't oceans away. They aren't fought "valiantly" in filthy trenches with dozens of pounds of equipment strapped to their backs. They're regular people doing regular things who never for a second thought their lives might be on the line. They could be you.

    Death is everywhere. Cancer, suicide, murder. Slightly farther away we find starvation, water deprivation, disease. To think that because we humans have built ourselves a pillowfort or two, death is any more preventable is foolish. But that's what we have to tell ourselves to make it. So when two planes slice our tallest pillow into rubble, it rattles us to our very core.

    By the time I have finished writing this, it will be 9/12. The CIA estimates that 108 people die every minute. Most of them probably don't have pillowforts built for them. I doubt many of them look like me. But that doesn't mean that their deaths are any less valid or tragic.

    We are mere steps away from a true global community, united past skin and history. But for us to take that step, we need to realize that everyone dies. Everyone mourns. Over three thousand people lost their lives unjustly that day, but they are a mere droplet in the ancient pool of billions.

   Life is short, death is random. Love more than just thy neighbor.

The Key to Defeat Isis

I have just read an op-ed called "What Isis Could Teach the West", by Nicholas Kristof. In this op-ed the author says that Isis is fighting smarter then we are. He says they fight for the long run and our military only fights for the short gain. He says that Isis uses illiteracy, ignorance, and oppression of women to create a society where extremism can survive. He believes the key to defeating Isis is to educate the woman in there areas to create a more stable environment and end extremism.

I agree with this author. If in the region all our country does is wage war, there will always be conflict. Any mistake our country makes, involving false targets and killing of civilians, will cause more hatred in the Middle East against us. The best solution is to build a more stable environment in the unstable regions. The key to stability is education. When people are educated they can learn to solve conflicts through peace. The women in some parts of that area receive little to no education. If our country can begin to educate the women there the region will become more stable and the peace will go for the long run.

Is Degrading Too Far?

On the night of September 10th, President Barack Obama addressed the nation regarding ISIL. A statement made throughout his speech was "We will degrade and ultimately destroy, ISIL..." We can all agree ISIL is a group that has caused a lot of harm. We can also agree that ISIL does not need to expand or continue existing. To have the destruction of ISIL as a goal is fair, however to degrade the members of ISIL may be going too far.

Earlier in the speech, Obama mentions that ISIL recruiters prey on the vulnerable. What exactly makes up the vulnerable? Is the vulnerable a boy whose family was killed by ISIL and has been brought up thinking this group is the only family he has? Has this orphan boy now been brainwashed into a violent extremist or is he still the orphan boy looking for a place to belong? Regardless of what the boy has become he is still a human being and international law has guaranteed everyone a specific set of claims as a human being.

The dismantling of the group ISIL is necessary in the fight against terror necessary, however is the degrading? 

The word degrading just carries so much weight. To degrade something is to lose all respect for it. To degrade is to demean something or devalue it. 

The prisoners at Abu Ghraib were degraded. The respect for their claims as human beings were completely ignored. They were forced to perform demeaning acts. Is this what demeaning terrorists looks likes? The actions there were not only completely wrong but also caused a great deal of embarrassment for the United States, that would make one think we were done degrading people.But with practices at Guantanamo Bay still very questionable, I wonder, what does Obama mean by degrade? And if he means what the word degrade implies, is it what is necessary? Or is it just too far?

Confusion about the ISIS crisis

During president Obama's address last night regarding the current conflict with the extremist Islamic group called ISIS, he discussed the war in overoptimistic ways. Although this may have been justified so that the general population could have understood the current situation, I think that he left a lot of information out, particularly about the crisis itself. As I was watching it with my sisters next to me, my little sister continued to ask questions about the war in general and my older sister had many specific questions about it. All of these conflicts in the Middle East are very complex and hard to understand because of all of the religious, social, and political factors, but I thought that he could have done a much better job of explaining it so that the people (like my sisters) who haven’t studied all of the different events in the Middle East which played into it could have better understood who exactly we are going against, and exactly who we are trying to help, because this address should be for the whole nations understanding.

Although I think that Obama could have done a better job in his speech with clarifying the situation, I also think that he did an excellent job in terms of the format of his argument so that it would appeal to both the humanitarians and the patriots. He talked about all of the innocent people who are being killed in the Middle East because of ISIS which evoked a sense of empathy in me and brought out the desire to fight back in the humanitarian side of me. In addition, he also invoked a sense of patriotism in me when he said how they had threatened the United States. Obama had a well-crafted argument which could have won over many people, but may have assumed the American people had more previous knowledge than they did.

It's Time for the U.S. to Join Veteran's Relief Efforts in Vietnam

The Vietnam War left horrible wounds in the lives of American soldiers, their families and the Vietnamese people. The effects of the damage to both the Vietnamese people and to Vietnam are still being felt today. Countless landmines and unexploded bombs dot the landscape making it dangerous for any who veer to far off the main roads.

Over 40,000 people, mainly children, have died as a result of land mines and other undetonated bombs left by American and American allied forces in Vietnam. Agent Orange, a chemical weapon used by American forces to defoliate trees has caused countless birth defects and deaths. This injustice has not gone unnoticed by Vietnam veterans, who have stepped up to help restore Vietnam.

Both American veterans and North Vietnamese veterans, former enemies, have been working together to help fix a larger problem, the death of innocent civilians. In 2005, NPR ran a story, "Ridding Vietnam of Deadly Remnants of War" about Project RENEW, an organization led by Jan Scruggs, a Vietnam veteran, and the founder of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall, which has attempted to remove unexploded bombs from Vietnam. Removing unexploded landmines is extremely dangerous, but  despite their low tech approach, the team that NPR interviewed had not had any serious accidents. Using only a metal detector and shovels, they have managed to deactivate hundreds of landmines and bombs.

Project RENEW aims to educate the community about the landmines, remove as many mines and bombs as possible, and provide relief for those injured by the mines after the war's end. This project has not gotten enough media attention and support as it deserves, possibly because the effects of the Vietnam War are not as present in our minds as they should be.

Another veteran who decided to help fix the damage caused by the Vietnam war is Chuck Searcy, who is working with Project Renew to rid the area of the toxic remains of Agent Orange. His goal is to remove the deadly remnants in the next decade, and has asked the Department of Defense for their support.

Although it is wonderful that veterans are fixing the damage that the United States inflicted on Vietnam during the war, the United States should do more to help alleviate the considerable casualties that are still arising from the war. The United States government still denies that Agent Orange caused any deaths, although conservative Vietnamese estimates put the death toll at close to 4 million.

The United States government has done little to stop the horrible damage that Agent Orange does on the environment, only starting to help clean up the toxic chemical in 2012. The United States denies that its use of Agent Orange broke any international laws about chemical weapons, as they argue that Agent Orange was not a weapon at all, just an herbicide. As the United States government commemorates the Vietnam War's 50th Anniversary, it is important not to forget those still dying from the aftermath of the war: the Vietnamese people.

War and Bees

The Vietnam War effort of the United States impacted far more than just Vietnam. The entire region of Southeastern Asia felt the military presence marked by the Vietnam War. Laos, a geographic neighbor of Vietnam, was subject to much of the wreckage and bloodshed caused indirectly by the American effort to contain communism. The Central Intelligence Agency conducted a ‘Quiet War’ in that region against the Pathet Lao, the communist organization of Laos. The Hmong, a somewhat apolitical people who historically inhabited the mountainous regions of Southeast Asia, became the American army by proxy against the Pathet Lao.

The American public has largely ignored the role of the Hmong in the Quiet War, although the CIA actively cultivated that ignorance. The WNYC radio program Radiolab, however, took notice of one striking story from the Quiet War. Among the many violent episodes of the war in Laos and of the Vietnam War in general, the existence of ‘yellow rain’ proves one of the most interesting and bizarre.

The Radiolab podcast episode ‘Yellow Rain’ documents the war story of a Hmong man named Eng Yang. He tells of the violence experienced by his village in the 1970s, and specifically of a phenomenon referred to as yellow rain. This yellow rain dropped from the sky and appeared to poison and kill entire populations exposed to it.

When CIA officers reported this phenomenon to the White House, President Reagan’s staff publicly accused the Soviet Union of the use of biochemical weapons. This accusation resulted in the discussion of the United States created its own biochemical weapons. But after close examination, what appeared to be highly sophisticated, microscopic, death agents turned out to be bee feces.

When the interviewers on Radiolab bring this fact to the attention of Eng Yang, he reacts with the fury and indignation of decades of neglect. He expressed his feelings of mistreatment and sadness through his translator: “My uncle says that for the last twenty years he didn’t know anybody was interested in the deaths of the Hmong people…that what we know has been questioned again and again is not a surprise to him or to me.” Eng Yang firmly believes, to this day, that the yellow rain dropped from Soviet planes on his village was lethal. The facts discovered by Ivy League researchers are of little consequence to him.

In this sense, the war story is both true and untrue. Eng Yang’s experience is true to him, but the existence of a biochemical weapon known as yellow rain is objectively false. Questioning the truth behind an individual’s story leads, as Robert Krulwich of Radiolab discovered, only to animosity.

Writing Our Own History

Writing Our Own History

American History X is a recent drama film, starring Edward Norton, which evaluates current American life, and more specifically, a former neo-nazi skinhead trying to prevent his younger brother from going down the same misguided path that he did.  

I found the movie extremely interesting, as it forced me to reevaluate my beliefs on race issues in modern day America, and how they affect not only my nation, but me as a multiracial citizen. The thoughts shared by Derek (a former neo-nazi skinhead) reflect many of the beliefs still held in Americans today.

I thought this film was particularly relevant because of the current issues America is facing regarding immigration laws and regulation, an issue driven significantly by race issues in the United States. While modern day America projects itself as a “post racial” nation, race issues in our media and everyday life support the conclusion that American race issues are a significant influence on the country. Derek, an avid racist and white supremacist repeatedly makes comments throughout the movie on how immigrants(he focuses primarily on African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans) should not be allowed into the United States, and their natural inferiority to whites.

While not a particularly uplifting message, I think this is a message, and movie that should be considered by anyone living in modern day America. While we have progressed significantly from race issues we have faced in the past, it’s imperative that we acknowledge current issues in the United States not only including race, but also class, sex, and age. Instead of being a proponent of viewing America as a post-racial haven for minorities, I believe Americans should be reevaluating what it really means to be American in current times.