From Knowledge to Opinions & Beyond

Writing research a paper is something that every highschool student has to go through, however, this year I felt I was able to turn an onerous activity into a genuine learning experience. In the first, I was able to create a stellar (in my opinion) thesis on Hidalgo & Morelos, and connect their characteristics with the leadership qualities of the ideal leader. The second essay was bit more difficult for me for I had to create love letters between two Russian lovers of the early 1900's and 1910's, one of which was a Bolshevik follower, while the other a citizen of a rioting industrial city. In a way I guess I mastered the process of creating characters, but from there I had no idea where to go. 

Research -- a beginning step to creating a paper -- came into play, and I had to dig deep. Collecting research material is tough, and I still have trouble finding the exact information I have my mind set on. Throughout the year though, I was able to improve on my techniques in acquiring research information by taking advantage of our school's library and the databases that our school website houses. With my paper, I had to point out the specific information I would need, and turn it into my own words, but the research is pointless without the most important component -- being a historian.

When writing, I try to think of each non-factual sentence as a mini-thesis. All of these sentences are opinions, and I feel that this year was a year for opinions for me. No offense to world religions, but you cannot have an opinion in that class without being pegged by the political correctness police. Throughout this year, and especially in the blogs, I was able to express my opinions in a scholarly environment, which will be helpful for next year. The blog was like a database of its own. From it gushed facts and the writers interpretation of those facts. Every class should have some type of public display like our class blog, because lets be honest, we should have outgrown the "I am self-conscious about my writing" phase after this year in history. 

To A block, you guys are awesome. I am intimidated by how much knowledge you guys have, and how energetic you guys are at all times. I hope to be your classmate again next year. Great year in history on the whole. 

Cold War

As kids, the Cold War made no sense to my parents. My father even said, "I wondered why they called it the cold war." They were both unaware of the true magnitude of what was at stake, but their two shorts stories were quite different. My mother's is simple: the Cold War had no effect upon her. My dad on the other hand said it shook his childhood a bit. My father mentioned that the scariest incident he could remember during the Cold War was the Cuban Missile Crisis. Along with his parents, adults throughout his neighborhood were scared of what could happen, and began building bomb shelters. During school, my father and his classmates went through drills in which they would crawl under their desks, and curl up in balls. Of course this would do nothing against a nuclear attack, but this was the mentality that emerged out of the Cold War. The Russians were the "big bad guys" and were no ally of the Americans.

Collectivization for Communism

In both cases -- Land Reform in Action and Make Revolution! -- the goods of the people are being collectivized in the attempt to equalize the population under the Communist Party. Rather than giving your life, like in the Nazi Party, the populace of 1950-1970 China gave away their personal possessions in return for a Proletariat political system, which in the end was ultimately under absolute rule. In both accounts, there is a mob mentality, fueled by the "old regimes" of China. Their ambitions seem to arise from unrest concerning the militaristic and political tyranny, and revenge seems to be their mode of political justice. T'ien-ming explains how this is the time for an uprising against the traitors or "wicked landlords." This same emotion is shown in the Red Guards, and Mao was smart in using the unrest as a catalyst for his own way of reform. In both readings, the majority wants reform, and their ambitions are clear -- take down the past regimes and instate new ideals.

Pop-culture/MENA/Africa

The Kite Runner: A book about a boy who immigrates to America from the middle east, and the hardship he experiences along the road.

Things Fall Apart: getting old

To be honest I have not read much about Africa let alone the Middle East. However, I have never really affiliated the term pop-culture with many African nations. 

Foreign Approval

After reading the section on "The Question of Palestine" in our book, I was convinced that the United States granted itself the authority without the right. To quote the book: "After World War II, the Zionists turned for support to the United States, and in March 1948, the Truman administration approved the concept of an independent Jewish state..." The question of Palestine was answered by the United States, yet how can we decide the borders, let alone the existence of a nation. To me, this is an example of the United States flaunting its love for democracy and peace in a land where democracy is unheard of, and peace is limited. On page 835, we can see that perhaps the state of Israel is not as concrete and defined as president Truman would have liked it to be. 

Land should have been distributed to the Jews. An independent nation was called for, especially after a horrific event such as the holocaust. Uniting the Jewish population under one state sounded/s like an idea worth fighting for, and the fight prevailed, or did it? Israel is now marked by the feuding war taking place with its neighbors. Was what Truman did the right thing to do? The idea was backed by logical thinking, but strategically, the thought process of the location was controversial. This is evident when looking at the present day.

Borders laid out in the Middle East are something not to be reconfigured. The United States did such, and now the state of Israel and its Arab neighbors are fighting over the answer given.

Nigeria: Rural Life

In 2005, 52% of Nigerian citizens lived in rural areas. In 2002, 49% of rural citizens had access to improved water sources, and 30% had obtained improved sanitation. This leaves 51% of rural citizens without the substantial amount of drinkable water us Americans take advantage of each day. 70% of rural citizens are forced to use some other makeshift form of sanitation. This statistic however, is less alarming to me than the water statistic. It is one thing to say a group of people are without clean water, but proper sanitation to me goes under the category of lifestyle. Sanitation to dehydrated rural citizens of Nigeria is probably not one of the top concerns, considering the small percentage of diseases correlated with poor sanitation in Nigeria. As Americans we tend to form opinions about the economy and general well-being of other countries in relation that of our own. In the book, we read that by definition, a rural citizen of Nigeria lives in a traditional manner, which was passed down from generations ago. Are these people necessarily poor? As modern Americans we have never had to truly "fend" for ourselves. We see hunting for food and living in huts as the quintessential barbaric lifestyle. This is the lifestyle that is in place, and if we look at the second statistic, we should be comfortable to focus all help on access to fresh water rather than building infrastructure -- we would only be enforcing our accustomed lifestyle upon a group of people who have lived according to tradition for centuries. 

Mamayev Hill -- Why?

At the time it was built, Mamayev Hill was the tallest monumental structure Russia had ever seen. It was built after a time of seemingly endless economical and political turmoil, but still stands tall today, marking the struggles, and the victories of Russia's past. Yet there is ambiguity surrounding this monument that I plan to attack.

1) How was Russia able to invest in the massive monument, and was the population pleased with the investment?

2) How is the monument perceived today among Russians?

3) Are there other monuments of Russia that compare to it's (Mamayev Hill's) stature? If so, are they similar to the Hill in the sense that they celebrate a military victory of Russia?

4) The statue itself does not look or seem to have any connection to the battle of Stalingrad. Why is Mamayev Hill structured the way it is?

Questions 1 and 2 are challenges, for they include takes on public opinion, something that requires investigation through speaking to the population or looking through interviews. These type of questions; however, are the most rich with information, and I feel public opinion is especially important with a project that has to do with introducing a memorial to a large scale population.

Mamayev Hill, Volgograd, Russia

Mamayev Hill is a monument commemorating the battle of Stalingrad, which occured from 1942-1943 in Stalingrad Russia (now Volgograd.) It was arguably the greatest victory for the soviets during World War 2, and Russians felt that the great battle deserved a monument in its commemoration. The linked article comes from "The Voice of Russia," and although not too argumentative, it is interesting to see the underlying pride that seeps through the words describing the intimidating monument. Through this article one will learn that according to the author the Motherland statue commemorating the soldiers of Stalingrad is the pinnacle of Russia, exuding it's superiority and somewhat troublesome past...perhaps indicating that it has overcome these troubles (true? eh not really.)

Now, a once war torn Stalingrad is now the prosperous city of Volgograd, as seen through the lenz of this author. From looking around at several documents, it has come to my attention that Volgograd is quite the "hotspot" for tourism. This would make sense, considering the "reality" of the turmoil this city once went through, the hardship it faced, yet now it is a positive, productive city.

Ironically, today; however, the monument was in need of urgent repairs to prevent it from toppling over. The beloved monument seems to be in danger of decay due to the high winds of Russia. This obviously illustrates how old the monument is, but also how important it is to the Volgogradian people.

If Only Dinesh D'Souza Came to Menlo...

Play it through your head. Dinesh D'Souza is introduced to the school by...the young conservative's club...my mistake that does not exist at Menlo School (and probably never will.) Nevertheless he is introduced somehow, perhaps by an outspoken teenager who feels their views on politics in the world are being crippled by those around them, or maybe by a teacher... Let's face it, a speaker like D'Souza would never be accepted at Menlo School. To be brutally honest, the points he makes about American Society are so anti-liberal that they would be bashed by the majority of politically correct thinkers of our school.

Nevertheless if* Dinesh D'Souza came to Menlo School he would see that we pride ourselves upon political correctness more than most everything else. He would see that there is not an American Flag in our quad, but instead a Gay Pride flag. What's So Great About America would have insight into the reasons for why our school placed a Gay Pride flag up in the quad before the American Flag, and it would also have a take on why most at Menlo would not even put an American Flag up at all. 

I will admit, I was/am a bit of an America hater, and have even imagined living in a foreign country for my adulthood. I have grown to be a critic of America, and lately all I see are flaws. However, D'Souza makes several valid points on why America is "Great." He says -- It is the country that has the most "rags to riches" stories. It is the only country where the poorest of people still own a cell phone and a television. It is the country that all other nations look upon as great; however, many within speculate whether or not our country is as great as others think it is.

Sometimes I think Menlo sees America as far from "Great." Perhaps Dinesh D'Souza would be an influence upon our school. He would be able to give us that conservative outlook that most are deprived of these days.

Heinrich Himmler, The Mind Behind Hitler

This YouTube video, is one of many, which illustrates the life of Heinrich Himmler, the number one man behind Adolf Hitler. This video is a little messed up, has ominous music, and probably the most ridiculous comments (the first one below by kingbub09 is plain f***ed up) but I felt that our textbook had very little information on one of the most important men during WWII. This video is a great resource when looking at the rise of the Nazi regime. 

WASPs: Women Airforce Service Pilots

W.A.S.P.s  were the women pilots during WWII and played a key roll in establishing the United States as a major threat against Hitler's acquisition of Europe. The roll for women in the Airforce emerged when there was a lack of skilled male pilots to take the newly produced aircraft into battle. Most male pilots were overseas fighting, thus there was a need for skilled flyers. To make use of the new aircrafts, the United States government launched a program to train female flyers. The sad part about this story is that female flyers received no honor for flying for their country, and had nothing that commemorated their efforts in the war. Of course it was revolutionary, and in fact there were few female pilots in service during WWII (if not none.) Nevertheless, women continued to get the short end of the bargain, and as the war in Europe concluded, they were no longer needed and their inspiring story came to an end.

My List is the Best List

Here is my list of WWII movies worth a watch:

The Great Escape: a movie on prisoners of war and their quest to escape a P.O.W. camp in Germany.

The Great Raid: a movie on prisoners of war and their quest to escape a P.O.W. camp in the Philippines. 

U-571: a film on submarine crews and their role in the war.

Hitler's Bodyguard: a series on the military channel illustrating the illustrious organization that was Hitler's Bodyguard.

The War: a miniseries on PBS, which contains real footage and photographs from the war

Black Market: Treason

Before WWII began, Britain had an organized system of imports and exports, and consistently imported 55 million tons of food yearly from neighboring countries. German, being the rising power of Europe that they were, wanted not only territorial domination, but also control of trade. The German navy was able to successfully decrease the import rate that Britain was used to, and Britain was forced into food rationing, similar to the United States when the war began. 

By 1940, Britain was forced to ration bacon, butter and sugar; however as the months went on, meat, fish, tea, eggs, jam, biscuits, milk, breakfast cereals, cheese and canned fruit followed. Townspeople were forced to register with the local shop, and quite often shop owners were reported to the Ministry of Food for selling certain goods out of paranoia due to revenue losses.

A Black Market was established, that catered to the needs of citizens who needed goods that were not easily accessible. The British parliament began to fund investigators in order to prevent the illegal buying and selling of rationed goods. The need for food coupons was too much for the average citizen, yet the government saw the Black Market as total treason.

In my opinion the Black Market was/is treason, and should be punishable by the government. A citizen is a part of a country, and must adhere to the laws of that country when it comes to something as meaningful as food rationing. The food they are buying from the Black Market, is being taken away from a family that relies on food stamps.

After The Drop: A Test for Moral Thinking

I believe it is no coincidence that this piece was created half a century after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. To commemorate the bombing of Hiroshima -- a delicate subject in itself -- is to call upon emotions of pride, but also sorrow. When watching this documentary and thinking about the thought process leading up to the drop, my moral values could not help but be tested. Call me a murderer, but I feel the Manhattan Project and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary, especially when examining the context of the time. Moreover, it is unfair for us, students of the 2000's, to criticize the decisions made over 60 years ago by the government, especially a government under the stresses of war. The decision to drop the bomb was not one backed by rash thinking, but instead by the moral values of the heads of our government. As an American citizen, knowing that a bomb's fate is controlled by our president may be surreal and uncomfortable for most, but at the time of the bombing no civilian had any notion of what was to come. Shortly after though thousands were celebrating across the U.S., and very few held regrets. 

It is difficult to think of an atom bomb being dropped by the U.S. today, partially because the present war is incomparable to that of WWII, and because there is little respect for the higher decision making of our government...otherwise known as patriotism. What does this mean? With no chance of a bomb being dropped, the idea becomes that much more outrageous, altering our mindset on the matter, causing us to make claims similar to "I would not drop the bomb for we need to think about the innocent." Such a statement lies on the back of emotion, and relies  not on context, but sympathy.

Analyzing the context is a crucial process when looking at the history surrounding an event. One must clear the humanitarian emotions from their mind, and look at the facts when deciding to do something as significant as killing thousands of people. Today, it seems as if emotion has taken over and the facts are set aside in the decision making process. Nevertheless, our government made a choice in 1945 that was based on instinct and fact, rather than on humanitarian perceptions that would have led to more days of war.

If you have the backbone to say that you would not end a war as soon as possible, then talk to a WWII veteran or a Vietnam veteran or a Korean War veteran who got the chance to watch their brothers and dear friends be killed by the enemy.... this might give you the perspective I am trying to get across. Dropping the atomic bomb was the necessary thing to do, because even if we had not bombed Japan, the war would still have continued, amounting to a greater death toll -- both American and Japanese. The U.S. military would have likely invaded Japan, prolonging the end date of the war, and the total war would continue.

I ran a little astray from the original assignment but I could not help but see that some people had the audacity to say that ending WWII with the bombing of Hiroshima was not the best way to handle the situation. I accept most all opinions, but this is something I feel too strongly about, and I will bet you most every American soldier of WWII would agree with me. 

Let Us Remember, It Is A TEXTBOOK

As a World War 2 enthusiast I could go on and on (and on) about how a textbook could embody the totality of the bloodshed, the strategy, the oppression, etc. of  the greatest World War our country has ever experienced. This; however, is useless in creating a textbook, especially a textbook aimed at highschoolers. I believe that our Modern World History textbook does a fairly good job of covering the crucial material that falls under the large umbrella that is World War 2; however it is easy to speculate and claim that they leave out or do not give enough detail to certain events that occurred during the war. (now is a good time to check my witty title) It is easy for most to let their emotions about WWII get in the way of what they want to see in a textbook. For Example: In A period Kyle and Sam seem to love the bloodshed aspect of WWII as exemplified for their lust for Band of Brothers and Saving Private Ryan. I could imagine for someone who is Jewish, the somewhat compact section about the holocaust could be a poor attempt at describing a most horrific period of time. Emotions aside, we most look at what information would be good for a 20 page (or so) chapter on WWII.

Now for my take on how the WWII chapter should be composed (emotions aside, because 20 pages consisting of the battle strategies of WWII would be enough for me.) My chapter would be named "WWII: The Rise & Fall of the Fascist Regimes."

I would start, like most others it seems, with the early days of the Fascist dictators and their rise to power. This way, the reader gets a good feel for not only what is to come, but also they can compare and contrast the leaders' ways of leadership, and make connections to what was successful, and what failed. Our textbook lays out the scene for WWII well with Mussolini and Hitler's rise to power well, and gives an unbiased account on how Hitler gained support. From here; however, chronological order makes the best sense. Date's, rather than periods of time were very important in the progression of WWII. i.e. Hitler takes power, D-Day, etc. Through the chapter, each section would start with a date. There would be the build up to, and the end result of this date. This, I believe is the best way to get the overall picture of WWII in 20 pages.

The Holocaust in my opinion, was similar to the Elephant in the room -- Allied troops did not start discovering concentration camps until 1945 because of the seclusion of the camps. I feel that the Holocaust should be in a separate chapter from WWII. This chapter would not only be on the Holocaust but also on the oppression of Poland and the countries annexed by Germany.

I might write more on this.

Kinda crunched for time and I realize that I spent a lot of time talking about how our textbook is well made.

William "Billy" Suiter

My Grandfather, William Kent Suiter was a part of the greatest war the United States has seen, and was lucky enough to tell his story. When the war broke out, my grandfather was attending college at UCLA in California (go bruins!) After he graduated, William enlisted in the Army Air Core. With his education -- something that many soldiers were deprived of when entering the war -- my grandfather was able to serve the United States without directly fighting on the battlefront. He was stationed in Guam, an island in the Pacific, where the allies were able to strategically plan attacks against Japan. William briefed pilots on their missions to Japan, where they would likely be going on bombing missions through Tokyo. On their trips back, he would debrief them via radio on how successful their sorties -- an attack made by troops coming out from a position of defense -- were, or what went wrong during the mission. The all important question: "what were his motivations for enlisting in the war?" Like most, he believed that his duty was to serve his country and to help win the war. My grandfather was a patriot, and I know that he indeed carried out his duty in flying colors. Colors of red, white, and blue.

Strength Through Manipulation

I mistakingly chose to watch "The Wave" part 1 video. Yes the dialogue was cheesy (a common theme among 80's movies) and yes the way he got the message across was cheesy as well, however this movie brings up a good point. The point is that Hitler did not brainwash his people, which is the common misconception in my point of view with students studying Hitler's rise to power. Instead, he successfully manipulated the people he ruled over, using his under ranks as tools for popularity, and his speeches for political momentum. I guess, and I wont stand too strong with this claim, that the teacher is similar to Hitler in the way that he used phrases to gain the people's approval. This experiment was a good one in the way that it encapsulated a small part of Hitler's rise to power. However, I do not feel that this video is the best representation of Hitler's beginning of the third reich. It over simplifies an event too complicated for a class experiment. 

Appeasement: One Winner

Before, on Robert Wicker's piece on appeasement, I said that appeasement=constructively kissing the ass of a threat. Now of course this may not be true for all occasions, but I feel that most appease for this reason: the one whom they are appeasing has some role in their fate. The family dynamic is one filled with compromises, but for the children, their appeasing begins around the dawn of teenage life. As a teenager, we are inclined to test the boundaries of "adult-hood," even though we are still adolescents. To get what we want in our secluded island of highschool, girls (or boys, or neither, or both,) parties, friends, we must appease the higher powers in our life in order to continue down the road of getting what we want. In the short-term, the appeaser rarely receives anything back, and is left empty handed. However, in the long-term, the appeaser, with enough appeasing, may get what they wanted, and possibly more. Or to be a little more frank, by kissing a lot of butt, the appeaser will always have it their way. I choose to have a balance of compromise and appeasement, for I feel too much appeasement leads to weakness, vulnerability, and the chance of being taken advantage of.

Guess What? You are in Total War!

A classic, filled with stereotypes and false persuasion sprinkled with fear -- all the ingredients for an effective propaganda poster! The ironic thing is/was that this is what our country ultimately needed on the home-front. No American truly knew what conditions existed in Europe and Japan, thus it was easy for the government to convince citizens that their troops were endangered, and in need of their home country's support. It was a total war, as the home-front became ever present in the fight to stay alive on the battle-front. Every American took on more responsibilities as food-rationing went into place. Families, wives, girlfriends, sisters, brothers, etc. were constantly writing letters, sending cigarettes and chocolate just to make sure their men had something to hold onto. This poster illustrates the importance of what it really means to work. Each day is another day towards the war effort, and if one person takes it off, that could be one more American soldier killed.

The Final Days

We have looked quite a bit at Hitler as a speechmaker, a leader, a war chief, and a scheming murderer, but in the article "There was such a feeling of joy"; six years of agony and hope, then one bright day of dancing in the streets., one will learn about the gloomy death of the most sinister yet powerful leader of our time. It would appear appropriate for the most evil man on earth to have a most horrific end, and in fact Hitler's death was one of a somber atmosphere. After marrying his long-time mistress and girlfriend Eva Braun, Hitler prepared his death on the eve of April 28th, and day of April 29th. He claimed that he never wanted a war, that his crimes were at the faults of "the international Jewry and its helpers," and that he was a victim of his officers (article contains information about the last days of war for Hitler's right hand man Heinrich Himmler.) For me, it is shocking that the man who started it all, ended it all (rarely do we see the problem solved by the creator of the problem.) Hitler obtained so much power that he was untouchable, however his one weakness came in the form of fearing failure. He felt only appropriate that he be the one to kill himself. It is ironic how the ruler of arguably the greatest military of all time ended his life huddled away in a bunker, where he shouted orders that would soon be given to his anxious yet hesitant troops. Hitler's bunker was directly beneath the Berlin Chancellory. He died directly beneath the hall in which his life as supreme dictator began. A revealing article on the last days of WWII, and the most socially corrupt leader of our time.