Reflection

           From rereading my blog posts I see that I usually have broader themes (such as current political issues) because I think that allows for a more open interpretation on the subjects; since people have very different political views. If I had blogged using narrower themes it might limit the different types of opinions that could be voiced, which would limit the depth and variety of a discussion based on that theme. My blogs usually set one idea against another and then I compare and contrast them. I'm surprised with my posts because they seem to have the common thread of either sarcasm or pessimism. I hadn't thought I was that the posts were all so critical before, which I think is very interesting. I also think that I should elaborate more on the topic as a whole and especially on the evidence because I know that in writing in general that is what I have the most trouble with. Not only that but it would help the reader understand what point or topic I am trying to get across. The blog post Obama vs. McCain all over again really demonstrates this because looking back at it it seems to be one of those blogs where there really can only have a yes or no answer.

       Over the weeks, I've noticed that my blogs don't seem to be incorporating the reader as much. This might be because I'm not very keen on blogging and am not really sure how this is helping me as a writer; I don't generally share my personal writing with anyone and because of that blogging is hard for me. And what makes this (blogging) even harder is that to connect these topics back to class if what we are learning doesn't really include many of the topics that I would blog about.
       
**CLICK HERE  to read my blog post.

Child Labor

         Well, this is an interesting topic. I actually did a research paper on worldwide child labor a few years ago. It is unbelievable that it is still going on. Are we as humans really that greedy that we would exploit each other for our own gain? Whether it's for power, or money, or both, its still happening.
         Researching for my paper I discovered that children as young as FOUR were working in dirty, foul conditions for little pay and being worked until they drop from exhaustion. With the children that were working the machinery many of them had limbs cut off from the gears in the machines that were exposed. But what was most astonishing was that NBA-star Michael Jordan's Nike air-jordan shoes was accused of using child labor to make the shoes. Click HERE or HERE to see articles about Nike and child labor.
        We were talking about this in AIS and sweatshop, etc labor is STILL going on today. These people are terrified of loosing this job that they have even if it is awful because they can't find work elsewhere. Many of the countries that use sweatshop labor are suppliers of the U.S. for cheap stores like Wal-mart and Target. If the U.S. is so powerful like people say we are why don't we do anything about it? I would rather buy really expensive clothes that don't use sweatshop labor than cheap clothes that do. I understand that some don't have the same resources that others do but that doesn't make modern day slavery right.

Still a Democracy?

          In this year's midterm election there is debate about whether electing politicians is still democratic (meaning that it is the people who choose their governors, senators, etc. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that corporations are also people they can spend as much money on the candidate of their choice. And of course, money is a very big factor in whether the said candidate will win or not. Which might make it seem like it is really the big companies that are choosing our government officials. 

        As can be seen in the excerpt from a website below, some people are very angry with the Supreme Court and feel that their opinion and vote doesn't matter anymore.

• Home
 
• Sign the Motion
 
• About Us
 
• Contact Us
 
• Upcoming Events
 
• Organizations
 
• Initial Signatories

• Contribute
• Get Involved
• Learn More
• FAQ
• Share This

"We the corporations"

On January 21, 2010, with its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are persons, entitled by the U.S. Constitution to buy elections and run our government. Human beings are people; corporations are legal fictions.

The Supreme Court is misguided in principle, and wrong on the law. In a democracy, the people rule.We Move to Amend.       (http://movetoamend.org/?gclid=CPX_nvyKy6QCFQRqKgodADF3Ew)

       Is that true? By giving large corporations the right to spend as much money on an election is the politician that they are backing still representing the people or only the views of that company?  Now that they (companies) are entitled to free speech how will they affect elections? 

      Does this decision tell us that the people's vote doesn't count, that a democracy based on the people is dissolving? 

Now I may just be-being dramatic and it may seem like I'm telling about the apocalypse but think about it. The Founding Fathers built our country on the basis of free speech and now that corporations can do whatever they want with their money is that going to restrict the free speech of the people? It seems as though money is what gives us our government, now. 

If you want to learn more about this issue click HERE or HERE for some articles.

Race

        Well, in AIS we've been talking about race. And one of my teachers put on the board: white, black (african-american), red (native american), yellow (asian), and brown (Indian/South American). Now this was how everyone catagorized each other. How is that right? How do you know how someone identifies themselves? I guess that it is human nature to try and put everything into a neat little box. But rarely does anything do that. And this goes on everyday. A good example of this is high school. Everyone (well, almost everyone) tries to fit in to one group. And these people usually have something in common; like the "jocks" who have good athletic skills. Or the "nerds" who are very smart. We all try and box everyone away and label them.
        What happens once we are out of high school, can we still use these generic groupings? How should people define each other? Should we even try? I don't think we should group people because these are how tensions are created (think of world relations). It just isn't possible to group people so widely. Everyone is different, every people is different.