STEPHANIE

What conclusions can you draw about Republicans and Democrats?** Both the Republicans and the Democrats are striving the make the best America possible, yet they differ in their beliefs and ideologies. The Republicans, being the more conservative party, have narrow points of views, thus they tend to moderate America within its boundaries rather than trying new things and bringing new ideas to the table. On the other hand, the Democrats have the tendency to desire changes in many different aspects in order to form the most efficient country. Both parties have their strengths and weaknesses, but their ultimate goal is the same; to make America the best in the world.
 * 5/27

The Republicans are in favor of fiscal conservatism. They want to limit the government intervention to its minimum for the nation to run individually, believing the concept of 'invisible hand'. Due to the strong faith in individualism and the importance of human life values, the Republicans run the country with less restrictions on daily-basis engagements between households and firms. One of the major differences between the two parties is that the Republicans focus on the rich because they believe that the more the rich invest in economy, the better result will ensue within the economy such as economic growth.
 * Give a one paragraph summary for each.**

The Democrats are in favor of more realistic and inclusive worldview. Often more open to new ideas and theories that are accepted by other countries that run successfully. Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats believe that government rules on miscellaneous factors are important in forming the greatest country in the world. Democrats, in addition, cares about the future and prepares well for it. They invest in education and technology now in order not to face sudden shortages on resources as well as money deficits.  Being the more "open" and developing/changing party, I thought that the Democrats would interfere less with the citizens. I also assumed that the Democrats would favor experiments, thus letting the nation run on its own (for minor issues). However, surprisingly, the Republicans, the more conservative party is willing to experiment with the society, believing in natural fluctuations in the economy.
 * Describe one thing about these interviews that surprised you.**

Supporter for the Democrat party is fiscally conservative, and shows favor for use of gun and military use. Supporter for the Republican party
 * How does each interviewee fit and Not fit into the typical party member?**

FEMINISM: THE IDEA THAT WOMAN SHOULD HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS AS MALES, INCLUDING SOCIAL, POLITICAL, AND ECONOMIC RIGHTS. FEMINISM HAS A BELIEF THAT THERE ARE INJUSTICES FOR WOMEN WHICH SHOULD BE ALL BANNED ALONG WITH THE STEREOTYPES OF WOMEN.
 * 5/18**

HOW CAN YOU KEEP AUTHORITY FIGURES HONEST? WHAT DO YOU DO IF AN AUTHORITY FIGURE IN YOUR LIFE IS ABUSING THEIR POWER?** One can keep the authority figures honest by making strict rules for such dishonesty. If there were severe consequences to one's mistrustful action, one may be discouraged to commit it. If an authority figure in my life is abusing his/her power, then i think that it'd be effective for the victims to step up and speak one voice to overthrow the individual in power. Cooperation is crucial, thus, sticking together with people with common goal will ensue the most effective outcome. I think that the last sentence means that restricting the information (done by government) passing through out the country violates the first amendment (freedom of speech). How important is a free press in a democracy? I think that the relationship between the press and authority figures is like two powers going against each other. Media has just as much power as the government (authority figure), but in a different way. Media has the ability to move the public, building enough power to overthrow the authority figure. The Watergate and the Washington Post resemble two enemies going against each other. The press, fighting for justice and truth, whereas the other party plans to maintain its pride as THE authority figure of a nation. Not really. I think it's necessary for the whole nation to know what's going on in the country. For instance, if the government is processing a potential law that may cause a dramatic change in the nation, the nation has the right to know what that is and have a say in it rather than finding it out later when such law has been already passed. I believe that the newspapers should reveal all sources for the sake of honesty and trustworthiness from their audience. It's easy for anyone to make up false lies that seem so real, yet that may have a detrimental effect in near future. Thus, citing sources will ensure security.
 * 5/12
 * SENTENCE ANALYSIS**
 * What do you think the relationship is between the press and authority figures? Think about Watergate and the Washington Post, also the reading we did in class.**
 * Should there be any restrictions on what newspapers can print?**
 * Should newspapers be able to report without revealing their sources? Why or why not? Is this important?**

LIFE MAGAZINE** The covers definitely represents the cost of life. Thousands of American soldiers were killed while fighting at Vietnam War. The desperation of the chief pilot on the first cover is reflected very well. The second cover also portrays injuries (casualties) that took place during such a destructive war. Perhaps, these covers notified the American citizens of the sacrifices Americans made trying to protect the Vietnamese from getting influenced by the Communists. The intention to protect proves America's strong desire for democracy as well as its want to enforce the best system of government all over the world. The somewhat disturbing yet realistic photos seem to provoke certain emotions in Americans, such as sympathy and appreciation for what the Americans have done and had to go through in order to justify the form of government in a foreign country. These photos are perhaps the best sources to refer to when researching about the Vietnam War since they're first-hand information. Despite the absence of text, the visuals themselves speak enough to tell the reality of situations at war.
 * 4/15

who wrote the doc: Viet cong •summarize main points: reinforce equality in Vietnam between different people, ban unnecessary laws that may deteriorate the reputation/position of Vietnam, and reduce U.S. involvement in Vietnam • what important information does the doc give you: • explain significance of the document: consider the effects it may have had: • explain what the doc adds to the understanding of the War: - What seems to be the focus of the doc, independence or spreading communism: I think it's a bit of both. The Viet Cong inforces independence from the American control over Vietnam, but at the same time, it also inforces equality between different people, which is the primary ideology of Communism: equality regardless of talent or skill. - What is the attitude towards the US in this document?: The Viet Cong wants to eliminate U.S.'s ideology of nationalism and the economic monopoly of U.S. in Vietnam. It wants to maintain Vietnam's domestic products for further development. In addition, Viet Cong is not fond of U.S. controlling the Vietnamese like slaves, thus it believes that such practices must be banned too. - do you see anything "wrong " in this document? Meaning do the goals seem just: The goals seem somewhat misleading according to the first two statements. When simply skimmed, it sounds as if the Viet Cong is promoting democracy through its use of the word "democratic" (#2). This may have been done to attract the Vietnam citizens. Other than that, from the view of the Viet Cong, its goals seem just in a way that they are conveying their claims clearly. - who or what country do you think has the right to resist these goals, if anyone?: If there had to be one, it would be the U.S.. The U.S. provoked the war in order to protect the Vietnamese from Communist influence, thus when a set of goals, like in the document, are given, U.S., since it's stronger, will overthrow it and push its own ideology regardless of what the Viet Cong states. Although the number of Viet Cong was growing, the U.S. had the obligation to protect the Vietnamese people from 'harmful' form of government, thus, U.S. would resist these goals. He decided to become a Marine because he felt the need to do something for his country. When President Johnson notified the country that he will not let Vietnam be affected by Communism. Strongly moved by that speech, Ehrhart signs up at the age of 17. Although his parents weren't the most enthusiastic advocates, he made it clear that he cannot wait for the country to do something for him, but he can do something for the country.
 * 4/14**
 * 4/****10 Why did he go?**

The quote on page 929 and the photos on the screen show the harsh situation the Black activists faced for trying to get the vote. Some had to banish their own family when not at home because they were afraid of what the whites may do to them. They also had to bear through long hours of sit-ins at courts to get what they deserve. Often times, enduring through violence used by the whites. Since they received the voting right eventually, all of the hardships seem to have been worth something, yet there must have been some other, perhaps calmer methods to achieve the same goal. If I were to be in this situation, I might even have given up due to its severeness compared to arduous tries.
 * 4/3 Journal: Read quote on page 929. What does this tell you about the risks and resistance Black activists faced in working to get the vote. Is it worth it? What would you do in this situation?**

No, it is not right to treat people differently based on the mentioned situations. Anyone can be more superior in terms of knowledge and wealth regardless of particular race. Generalizing the standards of status in society doesn't seem right at all. Especially in multicultural countries like the U.S. or Canada, people should learn to accept and be open of people with different race. Also, just be cause one is a Muslim, that doesn't mean that he/she is worse than a Christian in any shape or form. These days, females are capable of doing the (so-called) "men's jobs" such as driving trucks, buses, or owning businesses. Take Hilary Clinton for example. She is a woman, but she accomplished just as much or even more than her fellow politicians. Finally, these days, there are numerous handicapped people who are being recognized to be better in different aspects of life.
 * PROMPT 3/30**
 * 1)Is it ever justifiable to treat people differently based on race, religion, gender, handicaps, etc?**

Compared to the CIA intervention in Guatemala and Iran, Eisenhower's handling of the Suez Crisis was handled more calmly and fairly. With Iran and Guatemala, US forced its force into those countries and built pro-American government that would support US's claim of anti-communism. In doing so, US had to overthrow the countries' government and president, transforming laws and lifestyles of the civilians. On the other hand, Eisenhower handled Suez Crisis with more thought by making other countries (Britain, France, Israel) that were involved in the conflict withdraw in order to achieve its goal of eventual control over the middle east land. On the outside, US made it seem as if it was trying to maintain peace by encouraging the fellow countries to give up. Yet, that was the time when US slid into the land and took control for its own benefits. Its postwar values were to let countries govern their own countries, yet US prevented that from happening in both cases. Thus, I don't think it was done with justice, but it succeeded in accomplishing its initial task. The motivations for intervention in Guatemala and Iran was to enforce containment: to support anti-communism. Contrastingly, US dealt the Suez Crisis in order to gain more control among the Middle East goods (imports) in order to obtain more power and high reputation. Of course, the Suez Crisis was handled better since it didn't involve violence and forced overthrowing actions like the incident in CIA. Although the purpose was sneaky, I think that US dealt with Suez Crisis with calmer and more convincing approach.
 * PROMPT 3/8**
 * 1)Compare CIA intervention in Guatemala and Iran to Eisenhower's handling of the Suez Crisis? Did the US act justly and according to its values? What were the motivations in each case? Which one do you think was handled better and why?**

The significance of Gary Powers incident was that the relationship between the Soviets and US failed to improve. This resulted from US refusing to apologize to the Soviets from having a spy, Gary Powers on U-2 plane, to observe the movements of the Soviets. After four days of conference to settle this issue, in May 1960, Powers was sent to jail for his acts of espionage and illegal measures of behaviors. RESEARCH QUESTION: What was the aftermath of 9/11 terror? Explain the natural response of US, including new perspectives on civil rights and constitutional challenge, and new conspiracy theories that ensued from this horrific experience. HOMEWORK 2/26** The containment theory states that communism should not spread, and that it should be maintained within a designated are with minimal expansion. The Truman doctrine claims that America will help any nation that is threatened by any other minorities, such as the Soviet Union.
 * 2) What was the significance of the Gary Powers incident on page 850?**
 * 
 * 1)Explain what containment theory and the Truman Doctrine are. Briefly summarize the Korean War. In detail explain how it is an example of containment. Choose one other event from the text book, briefly summarize it and explain how it is an example of containment.**

The Korean war began as the north part of Korea, highly influenced by the Chinese communists, invaded the south part of Korea. North Korea was a strong believer of communism, thus wanted to spread the affect down to south Korea. When America heard of potential spread of communism in South Korea, it not only built an army within South Korea, but also sent American troops to prevent the spread of Communism. The war was very intense due to strong military force by North Korea, supported by the Chinese. There was a point where South Korean troops (including the Americans) were pushed all the way down at Busan, yet fortunately, South Korean side accelerated and eventually moved back up, up to what's now called the 38th line. Even until this day, South Korea and North Korea are taking a break from the war, which means that the war really isn't over yet.

The Korean war is an example of containment in a way that America was very active and desperate to send help to south Korea in order to maintain its capitalistic government and prevent communism from controlling south Korea. The key to containment is to stop the spread of communism, and that's what America has exactly done; to minimize (limit) the spread of communism.

Another event that is considered to be containment is initiated by the Marshall Plan. America felt the need to help European economy after WWII to take them out of vulnerable state that can easily be overpowered by communism. George Marshall demanded aid for European economy in every aspect to help them become strong and be opposed of communism.

If I were to start off my own country, I would have federal government. I’m speculating that my country will have more than a state, thus federal government would be efficient due to the formation of my new country. Government is supposed to make laws, approve various proposals, and basically look over the country. Having only one government in a country wouldn’t work since it’s impossible for one government to look over numerous states. Therefore, having one central government control smaller sized governments in each state would be more reasonable. Delegates from small governments can report to the central government of important decisions, then the central government can help them out.
 * Government?**

I think that the government should be responsible for providing freedom of speech and expression for the citizens. It's not just the government that makes up the country; the citizens and the people living in it contribute a lot to the matter. Citizens should feel safe, comfortable, and perhaps fortunate for living in that certain country. By having rights such as, voting, owning properties, women's rights, receiving proper education, citizens feel as if they're actually part of the country. Getting citizens involved in the community and the country seems very important, and simply making most of the voice heard.
 * What rights do you believe should be guaranteed by the government?**

Out of numerous industrial innovations (inventions) that were made in the late 19th century, I think that the railroads were the most important invention. Through the creation of railroads, the Americans gained the opportunity to move not only around the nation, but also the whole continent. Delegates from different states could gather and hold meetings a lot faster than they used to, which saved time and led to better and more efficient decision making process. In addition, the railroads allowed trades among different states, thus the nation could share each other's crops and equalize the (financial) status within the whole country. Although there were some consequences to the development of railroads, it made a huge impact on American economy. Many people found jobs and were able to interact with people from different parts of the country.
 * What's the most important invention of the time? (chapter 5)**

The opportunities that the new immigrants gained include new job opportunities. Although the new immigrants weren't able to find jobs with proper wage, they were able to escape from serious poverty or persecution from their homelands. Fortunately, they also earned enough money to send money back home to purchase land. However, there seem to have been more hardships for the immigrants compared to new opportunities. The immigrants also obtained health care and education that they couldn't get back home. They had to settle in poor areas and had to work for long hours with minimum wage. Their work was often physically exhausting and difficult. In addition, the immigrants had to suffer through some discrimination in America for having a colored skin or just by being different than the whites.
 * What were some opportunities and hardships of immigrants in America?**

1) I would give a 3 for this essay on a scale of one to ten 2) a) no, the student doesn't answer the entire question. The essay doesn't mention how business was able to advance b) Not very; overall, the sentences and content is too basic c) Yes, although i think that the examples could have been better if it were to be more in depth, but examples are there 3. The examples are detailed (specific cases), but it's broadness is not enough to prove that this person has knowledge on these subjects 4. Information is accurate, and yes, it's way too vague. Anyone who skims through the textbook can come up with this. One sentence examples don't support the argument, and listing examples don't work; need to explain and expand on it 5. I don't find it very repetitive, but overall, extremely simple. It's good in a way that the essay is exactly to the point, but it seems more like a list than an essay. It also does not answer all parts of the question
 * Essay Evaluation**

1) What do you see in the cartoon, including objects and people, as well as caption and words in the cartoon? //vultures with human heads standing on bones (says law, treasury), skulls, and a corpse//; also says New York on the corpse 2) What or who is the subject of the cartoon and how is the subject represented? //Boss Tweed; fat, jewel (wealth)// 3) Which of the things in the cartoons are symbols? What do you think the symbols mean? //Jewel: it symbolizes that Tweed is rich// 4) What is the opinion of the cartoonist toward the subject and how is it expressed? //selfish, greedy, work in groups, wants to inform the effects of Tweed Ring//
 * __Political Cartoon analysis__**

I think that the two most compelling sources about the reasons for war are articles 1 and 4. Article 1 claims that the U.S. had to join the war due to warfare attack from German submarines. U.S.'s motive was not to take revenge to Germany, but only the vindication of human right. On the other hand, article 4 asserts that Wall Street wanted the war for better and more efficient economic and financial growth. The war against Germany constituted the most tremendous profitable coup in the history of American finance. It created 21000 new American millionaires and 69000 men made more than three billion dollars during this period. The major difference between those two articles is that Article 1 sounds as if the U.S. went to war due to pressure and self protection whereas Article 4 requests that the U.S. went to war 'voluntarily' for its own benefit. In my opinion, those two ideas contradict enough to make the two articles the most compelling sources among the list of sources.
 * Homework 11/18**