Blog Post 4 Feb. 23rd

The assigned readings all have a common theme both related to each other and related to some of the past discussion we have had as a class. The common theme in the three readings seems to be that the way that the United States government operates itself both domestically speaking socially and internationally over the last 50-60 years has been irresponsible and, in turn, caused our reputation to be tarnished abroad and has caused social tension and inequality abroad.

 Evidence of this can be seen pretty clearly in one way or another in all three of the articles. In the article about European views on America some Europeans from various countries go as far to say we are borderline crazy with the way we conduct ourselves politically, economically, and especially militarily. In the second article about the truth behind Vietnam it is stated that the history has been muddled by the government to cover up how brutal the war was and that they are using the celebration of veterans as a vehicle for that cover up. Finally in the Atlanta Black Star article it is stated that the popular newspaper, The New York Times, that in the published article they are giving an unfair presentation by not addressing the the topic of how the persecuting parties in many of the described situations were white.

This all relates to earlier discussion we had in class because as a class we seemed to come to the conclusion that fixing the structure of government is more productive than "fixing" the parties or groups the government is presiding over. in all three of these articles the argument being made seems to agree with that conclusion. Some of the arguments made regarding these articles is that the war in Vietnam was a really a front for a standoff between the U.S. and Soviet Union during the cold war and while this may be true it doesn't mean that what happened there can just be passed off or forgotten.

This video shows how the domino theory of the effects of communism has effected human history. It goes to show that while Vietnam in itself was a huge part of American history, when you take a step back and focus on the bigger picture, it was just one of many aspects of how the U.S. and Soviet Union unofficially squared off against each other during the cold war. The argument could be made that the policy of containment was one of the largest driving factors in the U.S. entering into Vietnam. This come back to the discussion about fundamental flaws in the way our government handles itself and how it can be corrected.

In the videos posted that we watched last week in the "Make Mine Freedom" video we noted how it all seemed to be white males portrayed in the cartoon which, going back the the New York Times article, might explain why the term white was not used to describe the persecutors. It may be at during that time period any crowd that viewed lynchings of African-American individuals were assumed to be white. Whether this is right or not is another conversation, but it would explain why the New York Times published the article as it was.

Blog Post 3

The first video points out that some aspects of America are flawed, but in the overall our system works well to promote hard work and spur economic growth. The video seems to represent all races and genders as stated in the beginning of the video even though all it seems to show is white men. Though the representation of class is skewed because it shows a difference between the upper class white men and working class white men. These differences are understated in the video but when recognized, paints a distinct difference in the way classes are treated. I don't think there are meant to be implications from this difference in representation, I think it is just a media portrayal of certain job sectors that is meant to draw a laugh as it is a cartoon. This video somewhat relates to the concept of feminism we talked about last week as it show a woman being looked at as an object rather than a person.

This video shows how a celebrity feels about how the worlds political systems. He highlights how he sees the the social system is failing the majority of the worlds population. He says the world is creating an underclass and destroying the planet. The core conflict in the interview is whether the old way of doing politics works or if there is a new different, way of conducting worldwide politics that would benefit the worldwide majority. This interview seems to have a bit of a comedic relief side to it so it may need to be taken with a grain of salt, as we also don't know how credible the actor in the interview is. This video ties into last weeks discussion because it highlights how certain classes have a leg up in the world because of what they are born into.

This video really digs into the some of the theories behind the 2008 financial crisis, the main argument being that the current view of economics is fundamentally flawed, he then goes into explaining some of the factors behind his thinking, these range from cultural characteristics to failures in policy. The video looks into the idea of systemic risk as a  factor in the role of the collapse. The author comes down to saying that the root of the problem this time is excessive power of capital and that the pumping up of credit line spending , most notably on mortgages. He then makes the argument that policy has screwed manufacturers in the pursuit of keeping financiers happy. Overall this video relates to the conversations we had last week of ingrained ways of thinking in a culture and how long those take to break.

Blog Post 2 Feb 9th

This week in class we really dug into the topic of gender based inequality in America and what can be done to combat it. In both of the articles chosen by our peers gender bias and inequality were highlighted as prominent social issues that demand change in America today. In the Feb 4th article (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/01/31/us-rights-gender-idUKKBN0L323K20150131) the topic of whether or not a specific gender should be assigned to a person was discussed. "A growing

movement views gender as a complex, mainly psychological phenomenon in which a person's external anatomy is no longer the defining factor" (UK, Reuters) this led to us coming to the conclusion by the end of the class that a person should be able to choose what they identify as, but that that the social issue of gender assignment may be hard for people to understand both because of an ingrained way of thinking through the generations and because it is a concept that is relatively new and difficult to understand.

In the Feb 6th article (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/23/us-usa-losangeles-firedepartment-idUSKBN0KW05T20150123) the topic of both gender bias and racial bias in the corporate hiring process was highlighted. Throughout the class we discussed possible reason for this and came up with the reason for the bias is because of ingrained culture in America that takes generations of change in thought to truly correct. This belief is one that I argue is on of the foremost reason change is so hard to completely procure. If we look at a similar issue of civil rights in America, the right for African Americans, we can see many of the same issues being faced by women in their pursuit of equal rights. In the last 50 years or so we have made leaps and bounds in America that have given African Americans the same rights as white Americans, something that just a few decades ago, was seen as a crime to give African Americans. If we look today we can see that in just 50 years women have come from being almost exclusively caretakers of the home to being CEO's of world renowned corporations. While there is much work still to be done it should be viewed as an accomplishment what women have achieved in the last 50 years. The opposing points that were presented is that, while accomplishments have been made, not enough is being done fast enough, to this one must understand that nothing worth achieving can be achieved quickly, especially in the day and age we live in today, while this not be the right thing it is the reality I believe we live in. I say this because gender rights are not the only thing trying to progress in America, whether it be gay rights or racial civil liberties, everything is progressing at a slow rate, no revolution is being achieved overnight. The differing treatments of women and men in the workplace can be highlighted in this video.

At one point in the video it is mentioned that the woman in the interview came off as aggressive and that's not how women are supposed to act. This highlights another point we talked about in class, the way people think about how men and women should act in the workplace. In class we discussed how discrimination in the hiring process has to be chosen to by the employer to commit. If the employer has a specific way that they think a gender should act it is highly likely that discrimination will happen when that gender doesn't act the way they think they should.

 This article (http://www.cnn.com/2011/LIVING/04/05/when.to.act.like.man/) really seems to highlight the problems females face in the workplace. "Nobody seems to know where, exactly, a businesswoman should fall on the spectrum between "acting like a lady" or asserting herself "like a man." (Ridgeway, CNN) This really shows that there is  really no way to win in the workplace, you either get labeled aggressive or or passed up for lack of speaking out.

Feb 2nd Blog Post

Last week we looked at what some common American Ideals were. These ranged from racial inequality to how Columbus day is viewed in America compared to other place in the world, while all of these were tied to American identity by how they portray American culture I found that one stood out the most in the modern day. Of all the topic both discussed I found the wealth distribution to be the most interesting.

In the video it called wealth solely as income, which is a yearly salary. Wealth is the amount of money someone accumulates over a lifetime. Many of the wealthiest individuals in America that the video talks about have accumulated their wealth through many other forms of making money other than just a yearly income. These include inheritances or capital gains.

The Miss Representation video was also very eye-opening. The portrayal of women in the media has become more and more sexually based. The question I thought was extremely interesting was how far can you take the sexual advertising before the American Public draws a moral line in the sand?

This video shows how much the media still uses women for sex appeal. The argument for this is that they are doing it at their own will and are being compensated for it. While this is true it s the actors responsibility to know the line between what is considered advertising and what is degrading to women.

 In the video assigned in class states that " the restrictions that earlier generations had do not exist today" this is troubling because it implies that pretty much anything can be shown and portrayed by the media in any way they want. MediaKnowAll.com states that media representations of women are becoming more and more sexual as the advertising guidelines become looser and looser content wise.

Video Source: YouTube.com