Archive for the ‘Reading Response Memos’ Category

Blog1-From the Great Transformation to the Global Free Market

Thursday, February 10th, 2011

In “From the Great Transformation to the Global Free Market”, John Gray first depicts the positive outcome of the free market in the mid 19th Century England. “The free market created a new type of economy in which prices of all goods, including labor changed without regard to their effects on society”. This Great Transformation was produced in order to replace social markets by operating independently. Similar achievement is the goal today for organizations like the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Aside from this positive example of the free market, Gray shows us the negative side of it. “U.S free markets contributed to social breakdown—families are weaker than in any other country”. This statement rules out the “Washington consensus” belief that economic culture and systems will be merged into a single universal free market. I agree with Jason Gray in that the global free market does not bring on economic modernization everywhere. “It works against the free market as capitalism arises…” Just as Utopia suffered due to the global free market, I believe we all will suffer if we soon transformed into a single universal free market, as we would fall together as a whole.

Manifesto of the Communist Party by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels describes the ruling of the bourgeoisie with its massive force so powerful and its, “clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalization or rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground”. Similar to “From the Great Transformation to the Global Free Market”, a modern bourgeois society would bring crises to society due to the epidemic of over-production. I can’t imagine a society on overload; devastation would be prominent and uncontrollable.

Judging Globalism

Wednesday, February 9th, 2011

Amartya Sen’s excerpt about his views on Globalization reflect a profound favoritism to its affects on the world.  He states globalization as not only a good but “it is also a gift from the West to the world” (page 19).  The attack against such a proclamations are from those who agree that globalization as a whole is beneficial, but the disparity of benefits between the rich and the poor are so extreme that it can be questioned whether or not you can truly call this “beneficial”.  In those cases the extremists can label globalization as a push for Western dominance and unrelenting influence on the independence of the rest of the world.

The case i found most interesting was how globalization started not from the west to east but rather the east to west.  It is easy nowadays to get lost in the medial anarchy in the world and see how the world views the U.S. as a overbearing father carrying a big stick and using the term “freedom and democracy for all” as its slogan to push their own agendas of world power and dominance on the weak.  But Sen’s point that true globalization started with the eastern countries such as China inventing and developing theories and goods for the west (in this case England, France etc.) to take advantage of.  The Silk Road and the dominance of Genghis Khan’s conquest were easy streamlines for word of mouth to travel to the east to bring simple things such as gunpowder, astronomy, medicine to fuel the fire to bring the rise to the Romans and their lustrous monuments and aqueducts and the innovative warfare tactics of the British armadas.

But whether the central ideologies are from the 1200’s or from 2011, the case is clear.  With or without technology, Globalization is an inevitable product of human beings and their psychological need for togetherness.  The difference now is the velocity in which the services and news travel, case in point, the crisis in Egypt.  It can be argued that there are negative effects and there may be parities in the effected parties, but the case is clear, Globalization benefits all whether they want it to or not.

Blog 1 on Positive Effects of Globalization

Wednesday, February 9th, 2011

Blog 1:  “The Hidden Promise: Liberty Renewed” and “How to Judge Globalism”

The authors of these chapters (John Micklethwait, Adrian Wooldridge and Amartya Sen) have made their views on globalization clear.  They believe that overall, globalization is beneficial and necessary.  The good which results from globalization outweighs the bad.  Far more people are positively influenced by globalization than negatively influenced.  Those which globalization does not influence positively need to find a way to make globalization work for them.  Getting rid of or ignoring globalization is not the answer. 

Overall, I agree with the authors.  I believe globalization has many positive components.  I cannot even imagine my life without globalization.  Globalization has made my life what it is today.  As an American, I feel my life has been dramatically influenced by advances, inventions and creativity in other countries.  For starters, great shows such as “The Office” would have never made it to America if not for globalization.  This show started in the UK and has been recreated in many countries.  While doing my laundry, I noticed that none of my clothes were made in the US.  Most of my clothes were made in China, Taiwan, Vietnam and Indonesia.  Because of globalization, I am able to purchase my clothes at a reasonable price.  My watch, clock, TV, pictures frames and makeup were all made outside of the Unites States.  Globalization has allowed me to purchase many diverse items at low prices.  The food I eat is imported from all over the world.  I ate a Clementine from Spain this morning.  In the United States, it would be difficult to find clementines at this time of the year for reasonable prices.

Of course, these are just some of the minor ways in which globalization has affected my everyday life.  Globalization is the sharing of ideas.  People all around the world should share their ideas, talents and innovations.  Rejecting globalization would stop the spread of these ideas.  I acknowledge that there are problems that come along with globalization, especially for poorer countries.  However, as mentioned by Sen, if these poor countries reject globalization (technology, trade and social economics) they will never have a chance to advance.  Instead, we need to tweak globalization to make it work for these countries.

December 7th.

Wednesday, December 8th, 2010

In the interview , Naomi Klein discussed the idea of Logo and its effect . she first draw our attention on how much logo has changed. From brands and logos that was originally made and grow in front of you to being “a privatized concept of what used to be public”. Klein believes that brands and logo serves as a filling for needs of consumers, but in a unsatisfying way. she also pointed out that some company isn’t actually selling what they were selling. she brought up many issues relating to Logo and brand, like democracy, advertisement, processes of production, and many more. Overall, the interview was interesting because she target the issue in many directions and she brought out valid points and ideas.

In the Yes Man story, its shows how market influence choices and changes around the world. One main story focused on the Bhopal disaster . I believe that everyone can claim DOW responsible for the cause of this tragedy, however, even to this day, no one is taking responsibility. What Andy did in Yes Man shows how market control some major issues, including human rights. Yes Man shows that all investors want to do is invest, putting their irresponsible actions aside and focusing on their main priority, profit and money.

MEMO 4 – “The YES MEN” and “A Better World Is Possible” – Antonio Macheve Jr.

Tuesday, December 7th, 2010


The YES MEN clearly represent the voices of a people who have been silenced, the global citizens who have realized the damages created by irresponsible actors from global corporations. As the trailer shows, the corporate world feels scandalized about the YES MEN because they reveal an ugly truth that corporations do not want to hear in their gatherings. The YES MEN demonstrate that it is convenient for corporations to use the market as a source of economic growth to blur the faces of the real people responsible for market failures. They bluntly show the world that there are strong actors in the global economy who take irresponsible decisions.

The YES MEN certainly give a face to the masterminds behind global corporations that take decisions with detrimental effects on the world’s silenced, the majority of the people. Some of the people in the majority do not complain for the injustices for the lack of knowledge and others for pure conformity. This conformity and lack of knowledge from the people puts democracy in peril and maximizes the benefits of the corporate elites. Guided by the maxim that under extraordinary circumstances, extraordinary actions have to be undertaken, I believe that the world is at a time where people who know the truth should work to unveil it, especially when this same truth is stretching the world’s inequities and further impoverishing the world’s poorest. Without denying the complete indifference that many CEOs may have towards the least fortunate and the marginalized, I think that many corporates have reached a level of greed in which they have lost the capacity to understand or conceive the embarrassing and shameful damages that they are causing for the sake of making quick profit. This is bad because the misery that they ignore will eventually follow them, which will create a vicious cycle of preventable crises.

A Better World Is Possible

In spite of the optimistic title “A Better World Is possible,” the excerpt from the International Forum on Globalization demonstrates much skepticism towards the current economic globalization state of affairs. It points out plenty of problems and shortcomings, but few concrete suggestions directed to solutions. Some of the problems mentioned include: global bureaucracies eroding the roles of states; the current trends of economic globalization being directed more towards private profit rather than development on aggregate; the increasing inequalities between the world of power and privilege and the global citizenry; the infringement of state sovereignty; privatization and commodification; as well as corporate deregulation and global cultural homogenization. Obviously, by mentioning the problems, the solutions are partially given. Nonetheless, the real solutions lie in how much should be adjusted and how should it be adjusted? For instance, how much and on what basis should corporations be regulated?  Also, as a result of irresponsible corporate decisions in the process of globalization, more public goods that are non-excludable by nature are starting to be privatized. Water is a concrete example. In this vein, soon, the world’s poorest who have water as their only source of life will be deprived of it, which shows that if the trend continues, the world will  worst. A better world is possible.

WikiLeaks on Democracy now & Net Neutrality

Tuesday, December 7th, 2010

WikiLeaks is an international new media  non profit organization that publishes submissions of otherwise unavailable documents from anonymous news sources and leaks. Its website was launched in 2006, published by Julian Assange.  WikiLeaks presents a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States some might say.  It leaks out secret information to the public that should be confidential.  The web site is trouble to the world, but some might say that it is just only stating the truth.  On the other hand wikileaks can cause war between countries for the secret imformations that it has posted.  In my opinion, I believe in wikileaks to a point.  Some information is good for the public and people need to know the truth, but some documents go to far into putting people in danger which I think is the number one priority.  The government should be able to shut it down in my option to anyone’s safety, but hundreds of mirrors of the websites have been published, so it would be impossible.  Some people might sure that Julian Assange should go to jail, but why?  He is just stating the truth of of both sides of the media.  Just because people don’t like hearing about horrible things about there country even if its the truth doesn’t necessary mean that he himself is the terrorist.  Some might say that it is might be a threat to the national security of the United States and throughout the world but in reality he he just stating the truth in these leaks.

Network neutrality is a principle proposed for user access networks participating in the internet that advocates no restrictions by internet service and providers and governments on content, sites, kinds of equipment that may be attached, and the modes of communication.  The principle states that if a given user pays for a certain level of Internet access, and another user pays for the same level of access, then the two users should be able to connect to each other at the subscribed level of access.  Under commission chairman Julius Genachowski, the FCC has proposed reclassifying broadband internet access providers under the provisions of Title 2 of the Communications act in an effort to force the providers to adhere to the same rules as telephone networks. This is meant to prevent, discrimination in charges.

Resisting Globalization

Monday, December 6th, 2010

The Yes Man story sheds some light as to how much control the free market as on world issues.  The point of this story is that if we continue to let the market control and guide the way the world works, then we are doomed.  I agree with this because its time for change.  We need to do what is best for the world as a whole.  Greed has become the biggest driving factor to the market system.  When Andy pulled the Dow stunt, the Dow’s stock value decreased by 2 billion dollars.  The right thing to do is to clean up the Bhopal catastrophe but that would cost money and that is something that investors don’t want to lose.  I do believe that we have created a market system that makes doing the right thing impossible.  Everyone talks about doing the right thing, but no one is prepared to actually follow through with and pay for the costs

In Naomi Klein’s interview she says that a brand offer more than just a product. The product had an identity.  There has to be a story behind the brand.  If you have solely a product, then you can easily be matched by a competitor.  But a brand can never be matched by any competition.  It offers a sense of community to the people.  For example Starbucks.  It took the product Coffee and turned it into a place for everyone to go to, like a community.  Creating Brands opens a window of new forms of advertising.  In a way it raises the standard of living because brand creating keeps innovating new ways to advertise.  The competition drives up the quality of advertising as well.  Near the end of the article Naomi says that the market believes that consumers just don’t care that they are being drowned with all sorts of advertising and that we don’t care that we are being watched for consumer purposes.  I agree with this statement because  we all know whets going on but we still choose to have the newest electronic and to have the newest everything.

Cultural Globalization and Resisting Globalization

Monday, November 29th, 2010

In Chapter 46 Jenkins explains how Christianity is not only surviving but actually expanding.   I agree with him this because Christianity has visibly become diverse.  In my Church one can see a variety of ethnic backgrounds spread amongst the rows of pews.  According to Jenkins Christianity is not only growing in the global north but as well as the southern regions of the world.  Due to this change it has effectively changed the perception of the previous version of a Christian.  He also says that back then Christianity was thought to be only the un-black, un-poor, and un-young.  When I first read this I was shocked because I always viewed religion as a comforting zone of acceptance.  I never thought that society could even try to mold religion into a certain stereotype.  No matter how hard I tried to visualize a modern Christian, I couldn’t come up with any one type of person.  I’ve been exposed all my life to many different types of Christian followers.  When it comes to religion, I believe that it should be the one special place where your ethnicity, age, sex, political view or financial status does not matter.  In The Christian Revolution, Jenkins writes that if we follow the Marxist view of religion then one would conclude that religion will disappear as long as society progresses.  Jenkins doesn’t agree with that belief and neither do I.  In the united states alone Christianity is booming amongst professionals and highly technologically oriented people.  This fact alone argues with the belief that Christianity grows more in numbers amongst the poor and uneducated.

In Ethan Watters Article, he states that a group of anthropologists and cross-country psychiatrists have found evidence that culture, environment and time can spark new and unique mental illness to its habitants.  For example in some Southeastern Asian countries Men experience a moment of murderous rage followed by insomnia.  This is called Koro.  I find this type of information very interesting because my younger brother is diagnosed with Autism.  Autism is a mental disorder that has yet to have a concrete reason as to why a child develops this condition.  I recall a time when I read an article that said certain countries have a very low increase in autistic diagnoses per year.  It brought up the question of “is the culture/environment a factor to this mental disorder?
Professor Mehta’s experiment shows that we show more sympathy to those how have become mentally ill through life experiences than to those who have become mentally ill through bio-medical/genetic abnormalities.  Reading that saddens me because regardless of how you fallen ill mentally, they should all be shown the same kind of benevolence from everyone.  Mehta believes that those with Biochemical abnormalities have almost become a different species due to “mental health Literacy”

Chapter 42 & Chapter 45 Yujiao Huang

Tuesday, November 23rd, 2010

I posted this memo early before on my personal blog, I now post it on the main blog again because I realize that it is more convinient for people to leave comment.

In chapter 42; Bin Laden and Other Thoroughly Modern Muslims, Charles Kurzman speaks about how Islamists have turned into a modern society by setting modern goals and following moder methods.

In traditional Muslims, people preserve their traditional values. During the Iran and Iraq war from 1980-1988, under the law of Islam religion, all amusement such as drinking, partying, and videoing were banned. If someone violated the religious law, he or she would get inhumane punishment like whipping, torturing and even killing. However, in nowadays, the expansion of modern western civilization has influenced many Islamists to change their old ways of thinking and to adapt modern norms, share modern values such as human rights and rule of law. Lots of Islamists have graduated from educated schools and organized themselves along modern lines using advanced technologies. They attempt to abandon outdated religious practices, and are hostile to monarchies such as the Saudi dynasty in favor of democracy. According to Kurzman, both liberals and radicals give a new shape to tradition in modern molds. They believe that there are many ways of being modern.

Islamists share significant values with western modernity. Bin Laden, for example, “combined traditional grievance with contemporary demands such as economic development, human right and national self-determination.” Islamist states follow the path of modern Western states. The Islamic republican of Iran, embraces global norms by writing a new constitution and approve full adult suffrage.

Kurzaman also revealed the fundamental difference between Khomeini’s Iran and Taliban’s Afghanistan. Although Western bias lumps them in the same category, they have very distinctive view toward gender role. Iran is a modern state while the Taliban in Afghanistan was not. For example, many Iranian women have good educational level. They entered the labor force and active in many segments of public life including as parliamentary representatives. The Taliban girls are prohibited from attending schools, and women are banned from working at most jobs.

Both ideologically and in practice, Islamists have adopted modern ideas, forms, and methods, but one of the modern Western norms they reject is the separation of church and state. Like the Mafioso and other illegal networks, Islamists organize around informal personal ties.

Finally, Kurzman concludes that the war on terrorism has not generated the massive negative reaction among Muslims that some observers expected, only 15 percent of respondents considered the September 11 attacks to be morally justified. Muslim populations show that when free elections are held, Islamists rarely fare well. When given a choice, Muslims like in Iran choose liberal forms. And Islamists will success by following their promises to follow democratic norms.

Chapter 45 Obedience versus Autonomy: Women in fundamentalism in Iran and Pakistan

In chapter 45, “Obedience versus Autonomy: Women in fundamentalism in Iran and Pakistan”, Haeri explores the relationships between women and fundamentalism in the Islamic world– in Iran and Pakistan. She addressed the problems associated with perspectives taken on women and fundamentalism in the Muslim world. She also focused on the life experiences of some Iranian and Pakistani women to bring out the tension between women’s obedience and their desire for autonomy. States and fundamentalists tend to control women’s bodies, limit their movements, and prevent them from participating in public or political activity.

In Islamic law, the structure of a marriage contract obliges women to be obedient to their husband. They accept the dual relationship in a marriage where in an ideological scheme, they are considered as a person and a sexual and reproductive object as well. This reminds me of the life of Indian women that I discussed on my paper early before. Like the women in India, women in the Islamic world have to be submissive to their men on every daily basis. They even need to ask for their husbands’ permission to leave the house. A woman has no voice in the household and must obey her men and “submit herself for whatever pleasure he wants”.

Iran and Pakistan are the places where fundamentalism is active, but Pakistani fundamentalist’ interpretation of the role and status of women, marriage and family law is more limited. For instance, during the revolution of Iran, fundamentalists encouraged women to participate in overthrowing Prophet Government. Therefore, the middle class Iranian women now tend to interpret Islamic law in the way that empower women role domestically and socially.

Memo 3 – “In Israel, When Is A Jew Not Jewish Enough?” and “Bin Laden and Other Thoroughly Modern Muslims” – Antonio Macheve Jr.

Tuesday, November 23rd, 2010

Audio: In Israel, When Is A Jew Not Jewish Enough?

The audio “Israel, when a Jewish is not Jewish Enough?” exemplifies the impatience and somewhat lack of consideration for local values by certain Americans when traveling abroad. Although I disagree with Israeli settlements destroying Palestinian territory, I have no doubt that the young Jewish-American man from California, Jonathan Leavitt, had genuine intentions of serving the Israel Defense Forces and reconnect with his homeland through aliyah – the migration to the Jewish state. However, he should understand that being an American Jew in California is different from being Jewish in the state of Israel. In other words, there are other implications. One fundamental difference lies in the laws. The United States is a secular state, the first amendment to the US constitution clearly states that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” On the other hand, Israel is a Jewish state, de facto, which demonstrates the tendency towards the predominant strands of Judaism. In this case, religious life is currently dominated by the ultra-orthodox, which is a conservative and more strict strand of Judaism. Therefore, I believe that perpetually victimizing oneself for not being received with open harms on the first encounter will certainly not lead to an integration to the society.

In order to be part of the Israeli institutions, Jonathan needs to understand that he needs to get accustomed to the local values and the laws before entering local institutions. Clashes are understandable in the beginning because changing societies is not the same thing as changing a pair of sneakers, especially from a secular to a de facto religious state. I believe that there are steps that can be followed to be eligible to participation in the IDF and other Israeli institutions if he wants to genuinely integrate to the society. According to the rabbinate, in the case of Jonathan, it would be conversion in accordance to the strictest interpretation of Jewish law in spite of his bar mitzvah because his mother was not born a Jew. It takes that patience and less victimization to integrate to a society, for we do not all live by the same rules.

Chapter 42: Bin Laden and Other Thoroughly Modern Muslims

In his text “ Bin Laden and Other Thoroughly Modern Muslims,” Charles Kurzman separates radical Islam, which tends to be more political than religious, from moderate muslims. In response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 masterminded by extremists, the people of the Qu’ran have been targeted as a community of brutish and backward people who are not compatible with modernity by Westerners, particularly Americans due to their understandable emotional ties with the victims of 9/11. Nonetheless, the same people fail to understand that a significant number of Muslims also died in the same attacks and their families also mourn their deaths. Further, I am certain that the families of the innocent Muslims who died during 9/11 were not celebrating the deaths of their loved ones as martyrs. As Kurzman suggests, the people who have taken responsibility for the atrocities, primarily Osama bin Laden, are not seminary-educated Islamic scholars or better yet, they are not the people that most Muslims  would resort to for spiritual or moral guidance. Moreover, Kurzman demonstrates that most radical Islamists come from secular backgrounds and are not the most relied on people in terms of Koranic expertise. For instance, Hasan Turabi is a lawyer trained in Khartoum, London and Paris; Hassan al-Banna, who founded the Muslim Brotherhood, the first mass Islamist group was a teacher who was educated in secular schools.

The radical Islamists are a minority and in the predominantly Muslim states, they do not get much support; in fact, according to Kurzman: “the only majority vote that Islamists have ever received was in Algeria in 1991, when the Islamic Salvation Front dominated the first stage of parliamentary elections, winning 81 percent of the seats; it was about to win the second stage of voting when the military annulled the elections and declared martial law.” This demonstrates that the extremists are not so welcome by most Muslims either. Therefore, one needs to be very careful in making a judgment about a people because it might fuel unnecessary conflicts that will ultimately perpetuate hate and hamper coexistence.

Nov 23rd Blog

Tuesday, November 23rd, 2010

In the audio entitled “In Israel, When a Jew is Not Jewish Enough” I found it quite astonishing that many people migrating to Israel are being, basically evaluated and interpreted on how “Jewish” they are. Many people are considered “not Jewish enough” by Jewish law even though they fight in war to protect Israel. This stigma even gets passed down to their offspring- in which their children are also not considered or recognized as “not Jewish enough”. I don’t think it is right that a nation can deny you of your identity; people are being turned away for “wanting to be more Jewish”.  I wouldn’t want my country telling me what I am or what I am not concerning my identity. In America, we can be anything we want to identify with, being that our country is so diverse. You can associate yourself as being from just your mother country, or as I like to add, a hyphen- Greek- American, incorporating both my identities into one. I wouldn’t want to be told that I was not one or the other because I identify with both countries, and that is what makes up my personal identity.

Chapter 45 entitled “Obedience versus Autonomy: Women in fundamentalism in Iran and Pakistan”, I was appalled while reading how women were described in relations to their husbands. Women are described as basically an object in which she must obey the needs and desires of her husband whenever he wants her to. “A permanent wife must not leave the house without her husband’s permission, and must submit herself for whatever pleasure he wants… In this case her maintenance is incumbent upon her husband. If she does not obey him, she is a sinner and has no right to clothing, housing, or sleeping” (373). Women are being portrayed as a piece of meat in which men can do whatever they please with this object they own. I cannot imagine being in a marriage in which I would have to sign a contract in which basically takes away my whole persona. This goes to show how diverse the world is and how people of different culture view women in many different ways. We think since it is the year 2010 that we should be passed the whole idea of women being of lesser value than men, but clearly, this idea is still practiced and believed in other parts of the world.

Post for November 23 class

Monday, November 22nd, 2010

When is a Jew Not Jewish enough?

We hear in the audio about a boy who migrated from California to Jerusalem to enlist in the IDF. He was asked by the army what religion he practiced, he said Judaism. The army said that they could not write this on his identification card. His mother was not born a Jew, she had converted, so to them he was not considered a “real” Jew. The Orthodox and Ultra Orthodox are legalized and nothing else is. Even if you take a class you still will not be considered a real Jew, they say it’s cheating. The Orthodox and Ultra Orthodox say that it needs to be done by the strictest rules and by their relations and that’s it. They mentioned in the end of the audio that it was ironic that after the Holocaust so many people want to convert to Judaism, yet they are being turned away.

In chapter 42; Bin Laden and Other Thoroughly Modern Muslims, Charles Kurzman speaks about how today Islamists have turned to modern ways of living, including schools, technology and laws. They still hold their traditional values and work ethic though. Taliban outlawed women from attending school, but Islamists actually raised the girls’ education level in Iran. Charles Kurzman also mentions more about technology and how radical Islamists use satellite phones etc., leading to use of the newest high-tech skills and Americas war on terrorism and how it might possibly help the Islamists by fueling the idea that the US is against Islam. He also describes the longer affects, however, saying that “longer-term approaches to the war on terrorism also face ambivalence. The modernization of Muslim societies, promoted by the United States and its allies as a buffer against traditionalism, may wind up fueling Islamism”

Course material for November 23rd memos

Sunday, November 21st, 2010

If you haven’t posted your reading response memos yet, time is running out!  There are exactly four more opportunities: Nov 23, Nov 30, Dec 2, and Dec 9th.  For the upcoming deadline, you have the following options.  Remember, you must address *at least two* different items.

Ch. 42, “Bin Laden and Other Thoroughly Modern Muslims” (Kurzman)

Audio (stream): “Inside American Islam,” On Point, NPR, 9/14/2010. Top Islam expert Akbar Ahmed just visited one hundred mosques in America. This is his report. (46 min)

Recommended: Ch. 45, “Obedience vs. Autonomy: Women and Fundamentalism in Iran and Pakistan” (Haeri)

Recommended (audio-mp3): “Formerly Banned Muslim Scholar Tours U.S.,” NPR, 4/29/2010 (interview w/ Tariq Ramadan). (7 min 43 sec)

Recommended (audio-mp3): “In Israel, When a Jew is Not Jewish Enough,” Lourdes Garcia-Navarro, All Things Considered, NPR, 11/10/2010. (4 min 43 sec)

Nov 16 Latino Immigration

Tuesday, November 16th, 2010

Samuel Huntington’s The Hispanic Challenges speaks on how the Hispanic immigration has yet to successfully assimilate with the culture that is now American.  The Hispanic immigration is very unique.  It hold no similarities to previous immigrations from the past such as Irish German and Scandinavians.  The lack of assimilation leads to the realization that the American culture will become dual.  For example, the norm would be to speak both English and Spanish.  The reason that the Hispanic migration is taking over is because of its huge stream of immigrants coming over.  And their increasing rate of  producing large families.  This factor makes the Hispanic people more visible and seen.  Mexican immigration differs from past immigration and most other contemporary immigration due to a combination of six factors: contiguity, scale, illegality, regional concentration, persistence, and historical presence.  Another reason for why Mexico immigration is pressing thru is because it simply has to cross a boarder line/ small river. When one is so close to a country that is your escape from poverty, you will see flocks of people charging to this safe haven.  I believe it only makes sense to why Mexicans are focused on coming to America.  Previous Immigrations were known to have traveled thousands and thousands of miles  to come to America, Therefore making it more difficult to bring huge masses of people during the migration.  These people that were very far away had  to really think hard about leaving their country.  It was a decision that could be easily made, therefore making the immigration flow less and less. The Mexican persistence of coming into America has made them break out of being the minority.  Being that there are so many of them, they don’t feel like the minority nor do they feel the need to assimilate to the American way.  I believe that these theories hold a lot of truth to them.  If your on alone and considered an outcast, you would do anything possible to fit in.  But if your not the only outcast  and there is a strong enough group that you can fit in with then you will flock to them and not change.
The Hispanic Immigration is going at full force but Its not a negative thing.  it’s a new exposure of culture.  America has gone thru immigration before. It may not have been as rapid as this one but it was survive and make the best out of it.  It is sure to lead to new creolization

Hispanic Challenge

Sunday, November 14th, 2010

In the Hispanic Challenge written by Samuel Huntington; we are given an essay about Hispanic immigration to the United States and examples on how the us are a whole. “Most Americans see the creed as the crucial element of their national identity. The creed, however, was the product of the distinct Anglo-Protestant culture of the founding settlers. Key elements of that culture include the English language; Christianity; religious commitment; English concepts of the rule of law, including the

responsibility of rulers and the rights of individuals; and dissenting Protestant values of individualism, the work ethic, and the belief that humans have the ability and the duty to try to create a heaven on earth, a “city on a hill.” The US was formed and I guess you can say established a way of living. There were norms and most people knew to follow them. When the Hispanics started immigrating to the US, society started to change. With the immigration, do you think the Hispanics were willing to change their own set values to meet those of our society? I think that with any group of people coming together there could be a clash.This creed soon came under attack; it seemed as if the US had a bias or racist set of ways that excluded certain groups. “The impact of Mexican immigration on the United States becomes evident when one imagines what would happen if Mexican immigration abruptly stopped. The annual flow of legal immigrants would drop by about 175,000, closer to the level recommended by the 1990s Commission on Immigration Reform chaired by former U.S. Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. Illegal entries would diminish dramatically. The wages of low income U.S. citizens would improve” this quote, to me, pretty much proves that the US needs immigration to regulate the nation and keep things flowing. It would lessen the illegal entries and improve the lives of the U.S citizens, which sounds like a positive. There were divisions of territory “drawn” in the sand or divisions through water to stop other from crossing over, I think that everyone just wants a chance at freedom or a society where you can work and have rights.

With immigration, the U.S is able to see a culture that we hadn’t seen before the immigration, whether it be with African Americans or Hispanics. We are given and shown new and different ways of life like music, food, language and much more!