Perspective

One of the most important things that you have to think about when you are learning about history is what perspective you are looking at it from.  What is being exaggerated, left out, or misreported.  You also have to think about what is fact and based off of analysis of remnants from an event.  It is very hard to get exactly what happened, and that is why we must analyze today.  To try to determine why things happened.  This can help you make a better decision in the future.  History is just a story of what happened, and it can be affected by who is telling it.  (For example, Norways role in WWII is completely left out, possibly due to the misreport of a reporter who said that they "rolled over.")

An Oil Rush?

I think that it is very interesting to note that the book and a lot of people said that it wasn't necessarily a good thing for there to not be a huge population around the oil because of course that means that only a few people get all of the money, had there been a lot of people around the oil areas in the different valleys that it appears in, then  I think that almost a Gold Rush would have happened because a lot of people would all be digging around different spots, looking for the prized oil.  There would certainly be repercussions from this causing the price to shoot up as more people have less oil each, and then down as they tried to outbid each other.  There would also be problems over who owns what oil, the quality of land because of all of the collecting, as well as some oil probably being wasted (and being used up) as someone finds it unexpectedly and it spouts u  p on them unexpectedly.  One good thing that would have happened though was that it might have boosted the economy a little in the area, as all of the people need food, shelter, and supplies. 

 (Yes I finally caught up! (and sorry for not writing a lot on the map, being probably the last one to write on this didn't leave me a lot of options))

Ends to a Mean

I may be completely wrong here, and you can call me on it if I am, but to me it seems as if there are different "ends" in relation to the same goal (if that makes any sense) that are being met in these two instances.  Yes, they are both coming in a time when China is being reformed; out with the old and in with the new, seems to be a consistent theme for both of these cases but the different instances seem to be different ways of getting rid of the old and in with the new.

In the first excerpt, changes had already been made in terms of land distribution, and it seemed that the people were being turned against the old powers/older landlords.  These people had been an important official for some time, and as you could see, nobody wanted to strike the person at first.  With more prodding though, one after another rose up to be able to take down the official thus thrusting the area into a new age, with new different powers.

In the second example, the Red Guards are revolting against the old, by also destroying everything old, but this time, more in the form of things, and laws that were being held in the house.  To me it seemed as if they seemed to have the air of "Oh of course we can do this," as they made it clear that they were revolting.  

In both cases, there didn't seem to be any opposing force to these two groups destroying the old order. What little resistance for the second example was in the example of saying that it was against the Constitution, but that was quickly put down by saying that there was no Constitution anymore, as the person should be able to see from the revolt.  

I say ends to a mean because it seems like there is already an, at least partially, reformed China, and that these two events happened because there was a change going on.  So even though these were helping the change along, there was already a change in the making, which was probably what caused these events in the first place.

Cold War History

One of the main things that was talked about regarding the cold war's effect in America, was the bomb shelters that were created by the Americans.  My mom said that most of her neighbors in Georgia had them in their backyards but she personally didn't have them.  

As a college student at Stanford, one of the international campuses that she went to was in Germany.  While in Germany she saw the Berlin wall, so she said that it was really weird when it came down.  Although it didn't have as much of an affect on my sister and me, I think that she felt very similar after 9/11, because we, as a family, had been in a taxi driving right past the Twin Towers just a few weeks before the tragedy.  The feeling that "we have just seen that and now it is gone," is a very weird one, and a lot of the Germans probably felt the same way when the wall went down.

Maybe I Have, Maybe I Haven't

Although I probably have seen or read something by an African or a Middle Eastern writer I haven't paid that much attention to who writes or directs movies enough to give particulars.  Unfortunately the only ones that I can truly give are the books Things Fall Apart, and The Kite Runner. I think that both of these books are pretty good and are fairly interesting but these are the only two that I can give with confidence of the writer behind the book.

Central Africa at War

The basic focus point of the problems of central Africa from the textbook was that it was always at war and there was constant civil war.  When I looked on the WHO for the Central African Republic's Death Causes I found it interesting that it didn't have war or fighting as one of the causes.  Then I looked back in the textbook and thought maybe go more towards individual country, so I looked up the Democratic Republic of Congo and found that 5% of all of the deaths (something like 44 of 987) were caused by war.  I thought that was a little amazing among itself, 5% of the country dies because of war (I think annually).  

Next I looked up Rwanda and then Burundi.  Again, for Rwanda, war wasn't even listed, but for Burundi it was 7% or about 8 out of 120 people.  The textbook said that there was constant civil war and even with talks of peace it still continues on and on, so you would have to think that these fatality numbers are constant from year to year.  This seems amazing considering all of the other potential problems that Africa has, from diseases to economic problems, to still have that many people die annually in these countries is a little ridiculous.

Camp Norway

I have a couple questions about not only my monument but what it commemorates.  First:

1. Why would the Norwegians be one of the few groups who really tried to resist the German rush?

2.Is this the only considerable monument for the Norwegians (or one of the select few?

3.  Why is the monument in four different places, multiple monuments?

Although I could take a guess on the answer to number one, but  I would have to do some more research to back it up.  There are also probably more questions to be asked as research continues, but these preliminary ones will hopefully start me off.  Norway is a very underrated country and is still pretty successful in terms of the map that we saw in class, I hope that I can do it the justice that it deserves.

Camp Norway

There is not much to say (after trying three different opening sentences) about adding articles for others to explore about the monument Camp Norway (opened in May 1994) except that there is not a whole lot of opinion about it out there on the web (so far I will probably keep looking and find a whole bunch of stuff).  There are only two explanations of why I would think that there wouldn't be a lot about it.  One, there is only so much to say about it and maybe monuments in general, and two, a smaller Northerly country like Norway probably doesn't get that much attention on a National scale (I myself am a huge Norway supporter).  Even so, I was able to find one good websites with the secondary article and the second news article still in the works.

http://www.emb-norway.ca/norwaycanada/campnorway/story/story.htm

http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/monuments/ns/lunennor.htm

(added post with a clip from a newspaper)  http://www.ns1763.ca/lunenco/norwaycmp.html

Some other sites

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=feature/norway/norwaypurpose

http://goscandinavia.about.com/od/historyart/p/scanhist.htm 

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=Norway+Monuments&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm 

Just A Piece of Literature?

While I'm not quite sure if someone already used this website (no one had used the site link in their blog) it is basically an excerpt from Fran(t)z Fanon's book The Wretched of the Earth.   Going into it with basically no knowledge about Fran(t)z Fanon except that he was an African American that was an advocator of decolonization, from his rhetoric you can definitely tell that he is a speaker/advocator calling upon his comrades and brothers to hear his words and take action.

One thing that I find particularly interesting is that he says that Europe is falling down into an abyss.  This piece was published in 1961 which was right smack in the middle of the Cold War.  It is almost imposing a doomsday thought into those that are reading his piece.

Fanon says that the only colony to catch up with Europe is now the monster superpower the United States, and that therefore his goal is to have his own country catch up in the same way to "create a third Europe."  This seems fairly different than the decolonial advocate that I thought we were supposed to be researching.  Unless of course he is arguing that colonialism hinders the places that are colonized so that when they are free they catch up into more superpowers that can get involved in more affairs/wars.

First a Job, Now a Uniform and Gun!

Just from looking at what a single paragraph about the WACs as well as finding out what it stands for can tell you how there was a change in the role of women from WWI to WWII.  Members of the WACs or Women's Army Corps not only helped build ammo and guns but some (over 150,00) even fought in the war.  Although this was not thought of as "the best thing since sliced bread" and there was some difficulty in accepting women in the war, in the end it seemed as if the sheer increase/number of people fighting in the war was enough for them to accept it.  This tells us that this was such a big war that just getting more people into it, no matter who those people were was a very important thing.

WWI:  Was the revolution for more women getting jobs during the war.  Holding down the fort almost, and making supplies to send off.  People accepted this but they still thought that it was a temporary basis and when the war was over, the most men took their jobs back.

WWII:  Was the revolution for women fighting in the war.  As the women held down the morale back home, here they kept morale up by fighting in the war, receiving many thousands of letters (65,000 per shift).  They were good fighters as well as 657 WACs received metals and citations.  

Source: http://www.history.army.mil/brochures/wac/wac.htm

Other blogs talking about the WACs or the WAACs:  Molly Eliza Priyanka Rebecca

Modern (sort of) Media of/about WWII

Although off of the top of my head I couldn't think of very many movies that I had watched or books that I had read that took placer during WWII, I saw one that was already posted and that seemed to spark my memory about the subject:

Sound of Music:  Musical based during WWII about a nun who goes to help an Austrian family and ends up falling in love with the captain.  In it are huge references to the affects of the Hitler Youth, and of Nazi control, both in their flag and in the way they try to force the captain into a position in their army.

A Separate Peace: (Yes I know that most of us, if not all read it.)  Takes place in a boys military training/boarding school about the events that happen between Gene Forrester and Phineas at Devon school.

The Pianist: Just recently I watched part of this movie and it was a lot to handle.  There were some pretty stunning scenes in it and although I didn't see the entire thing, one part in particular, when the Nazis throw a person in a wheelchair because he/she can't stand up, is pretty gruesome, along with some of the other things that the Nazis make the Jewish people do.  You can also see the growth of power, similar to Maus, as the control that the Nazis have grows more and more.

Never Forget/Remember the Titans

I think that NBC aired the program on the 50th anniversary almost as a change of pace.  We are always hearing and remembering U.S. events and all of the good and bad things that have happened for and to the U.S.  It is not often that we remember something bad/negative that we have done.  Among the many, there are events that we should probably remember more than we do and they thought (probably rightly) that this should be one of them that should be remembered more.  I thought the way that they showed relived how the dropping was good for the subject.  Since it is highly controversial, they just gave the facts and backed up why the Americans were happy.  This backup is almost a saving of what the U.S. did and why we were so happy, by showing how pivotal these giant bombs were to the U.S. war effort.  Even so, they still do give all of the death tolls making sure that the bad isn't forgotten.

Quick Note: They also show it like historians, and show the affects today and what has been done in Japan to commemorate the event and the consequences of it.

More Propaganda (and Photos of the War)

Among the many pictures that caught my eye, there were three that stuck out in different, and yet similar ways.  Although that sentence may be a bit hard to swallow, if I looked at the pictures, it struck an odd cord in me.

                        

These first two pictures, are two classic war propaganda posters.  The one on the right, which has become a huge symbol of the U.S. shows the classic patriot, Uncle Sam, calling on the average American to join the war.  To show how huge of an icon it is and was, between 1917 and 1918 over four million copies were printed for World War I.  The one next to it, of Uncle Sam rolling up his sleeves with his hat knocked off, wielding his wrench to finish off the "Japs" is set to inspire Americans for the end of World War II, and asks them to help in ending it.  This was a good poster for the time, because, in running from 1941-1945, it started just after the Germans were starting to wind down with their surrender at Stalingrad in 1943 and ran until the Japanese surrendered in 1945.  There was that period between where we switched focuses and this poster does a great job of saying that we will defeat the Japanese like we did the Germans in finishing "the job."  "The Job" is a curious term as well because it implies that the war is just a job, or that we are working for something.  This could be effective because there are so many things that could go into what the job is trying to accomplish, that it can apply to many different people.

The final picture needs a little context before you can grasp what it means.  This store was owned by a Japanese-American and graduate of the University of California, and was closed (and sold (it looks like))due to Evacuation Orders (The Evacuation was when most if not all of the Japanese-Americans living on the West Coast were moved to camps, being forced to sell all of their things along the way: Houses, items).  In the window the owner put up the sign "I AM AN AMERICAN" signifying that even though he/she was taken away she wanted to make it known that he/she completely disagreed with what was going on and that he/she is still American.  This image is interesting because in commemorating the hardships of the Japanese-Americans, it almost contradicts the two Uncle Sam posters and what America is.  Although is does show some of the American Patriotism spirit in that is was an American who stood by who he/she was and even tried to change things/revolutionize what was going on. (Ironically, you would think that moving all of the Japanese-Americans and forcing them to go through such hardships, they would want to fight back more)

Quick Note:  While trying to search the "Finish the Job" poster, I saw one that had "Mr. Peanut Goes to War"  which I thought pretty weird, although interesting.

The Ideal Textbook

While I don't know if this would be the ideal textbook for most people, for me at least, the textbook would be better if it was written with everything in order.  While I do like the fact that there is a timeline that has all of the dates in it, and would put it in after every section to make sure people get a good idea on the separation between the dates and what was done in response to what, I think that it would be easier to read and understand if it didn't jump back and forth from Germany in 1934 to Japan in 1931.  In my textbook I would put everything all mixed in saying who did what, whether "who" is Japan, Germany, or the U.S, but all in chronological order.  For me, this would give me a little more perspective on what was going on when.

This would also allow the reader to have an easier time at going back to review.  Similar to the book, where if the timeline is after the section, then you know what is in that section by looking at what is on the timeline, in my book, the timeline will either be at the end of the chapter, or the different sections (sections broken up by date or by mood or actions of the war).  This will allow the reader to see, "Oh, this happened in 1934.  To get more information, I will go to the section about 1934."

Regarding the Holocaust vs. The War in General, I think that I would do it almost similarly to the book, where the sections are separate, but I think that I would devote more to it than our book does, because it is such an important topic.  Again though, I would try to present things in order, starting with the Kristallnacht, and ending with the end.  

While I think that our book gets the information across, I think that there are ways of making the information clearer and more understandable, as well as there probably could be a little more information added on some particular subjects.  There are probably many ways of doing this but I think that my changes would work the best.  (For me anyways.)

Edit: Title could be "I'll be home by Christmas."  While this probably applies more to WWI, you could probably say it in German based off of the diary of the german soldier in the book.  The second section could be:  "The Years of Broken People" again though in German, as a play on the Kristallnacht which is one of the first events to start off the Holocaust.

Counter Intelligence

While talking to my grandfather, an Italian American, about his experiences in the war, I found myself thinking a little bit about the book A Separate Peace that we read in English Class because when I asked him about how he got into the war, he said that he volunteered because he could have a choice of what he did instead of waiting to be drafted where he would be a "pawn," having to do anything that he was ordered to do.   In the book, the kids were pitched different jobs that they could choose for before they were drafted somewhere.  I didn't even think about that as being a true thing, but I guess that it is/was.

Anyways, he chose to enlist as a weather officer and went to Reed College in Oregon to train/work.  A weather officer was sort of like a meteorologist working in the army air force core, telling the pilots what sort of weather to expect when they are out flying.  

He didn't work there very long though and later he was transfered/went to Yale to train to be a Communication Commissions Officer.  From there he worked as a counter intelligence officer for the rest and majority of his war career. 

I have always thought it very cool that I have family who have been in the counter intelligence and while I don't know exactly what specific jobs he did, I'm not sure whether that is on purpose or due to lack of good questioning, it is still cool to know that I have relations to someone in that area.

Quick Question

After watching the documentary on the Stanford Prison experiment, I was left wondering a couple of things.  First, why didn't the people have the students talk again after so many years?  You would think that the people would have some pretty interesting things to say so many years after it occurred.  Plus, some of the actual reaction might have "worn off," which might mean that they could have a more meaningful conversation.  

Also, why didn't the documentary have any interviews of any of the other participants?  We can probably assume why the other guards didn't stop the main one, but what do the guards have to say for themselves?  

Another question that I have, among the many, is was there ever going to be a prison break or what did the prisoners do right after they were released?  Did they take a day or two to recover, or did they tell anyone about what was going on?  You would have to think that they did something after all that they went through.  Maybe they suffered from almost a Post Traumatic  Stress Syndrome and thought that if they told anyone, they would be taken back to the prison.  This might make sense because at least one person had to be told directly that it wasn't a prison before he would agree to be let go.

Finally, did the experiments have any longerish term affects on any of the participants, guard or prisoner, because you couldn't just think that they could go through all that and then just let it go.  

Appeasement, A Mouse, and a Cookie

While at times, appeasement can seem to be the best option, especially if the potential consequence for not giving someone the thing that they want is a world war, in some cases, as in the case of Germany, it is almost better to assert your power and say no, before you become helpless under the power that you have given them.

This can also be seen in the book If you Give a Mouse a Cookie. Had the boy said no to the mouse and then taken the dislike from the mouse, he might not have had a big problem. Sure the mouse could potentially eat your house down from the inside out, once you get rid of him (probably with the help of an ally; a cat (possibly France) or an exterminator (the U.S.A.)) then your problem will be over, sure you may be a few dollars down, but there would be no mess in your house and you would then get to enjoy two delicious cookies with two glasses of milk.

Instead of taking Germany out as soon as they started to create their air force, or when they started to build up their army, then they would have put down a weaker opponent than after they have given them this military power and positioning. Once the other world powers allowed them to get a few things, air force, army, and the Rhinelands, then it becomes increasingly hard to say no, one because they could say well you gave us these, and the other because they now have an army, air force, and more land. Unfortunately this becomes a tragic cycle until they have so much power and want something so ridiculous, to the other countries, that now a bigger problem will erupt.

It is important to look at what the other party is getting and wether it is a better choice than if they had not given it to them. Although there are times when just giving something is a better choice, because of creating better relationships or stopping skirmishes, when in the long run, a whole bunch of seemingly little things build up and cause an even bigger problem than before, it is hard not to regret your decision giving them that first thing.

Dr. Seuss Political Cartoons

While fishing through the many political cartoons that Dr. Seuss gave to readers everywhere before his popular children's stories it amazed me that he had so much variety and range to his cartoons. He had cartoons ranging from Holiday's to how the War is going, to Battles, to people of the war. These two cartoons, found under Ireland and Greece, are two that I not only liked, but thought that they would be O.K. to post on the blog. Unfortunately, I think that it was some of this "terriblesness" whether because of it being "politically incorrect" or something along those lines. Just that "so bad but true" type of humor. Being that it is Dr. Seuss, of course the pictures are going to be fantastic, but it is sort of the tone that makes his pictures ironic. You usually associate Dr. Seuss with really happy things and what he is writing about isn't all that joyful.

Both of these two cartoons are, in my opinion fantastic. In the Greece one, Mussolini, depicted consistently as an older man with a lot of wounds, here a band aid, is pulling off the wings of the weaker, more beautiful countries of Greece, Croatia, Albania, and Ethiopia, while an army of super-butterflies comes at him from behind daring him to pull off their wings. Not only does this article challenge Mussolini, as most do, it talks about "The Inevitable Invasion of Italy," written amongst the charging butterflies. Because the Butterflies, probably the U.S. or Britain, or France of something, are coming while he is pulling off the wings, implies that we are going to get tired of what he is doing and are going to come to the rescue of the beaten down weaker butterflies. (There is also another good cartoon of Mussolini as the master chef teaching the other world leaders how to make "Victory Spaghetti," which could probably be a lot of different things. He also notes that the ingredients will never run out which means that it can be attained over and over forever.)

The Ireland one is a great cartoon too. Discussing the Nazi's influence on happy old Ireland, Dr. Seuss pokes a bit of fun at the Irish by having the German Hitler Figure sing a rhyming song. Hitler sings, while playing the harp, that he is going to bring snakes back to Ireland. This is showing something terrible will happen to them, because Hilter's actions basically counteract St. Patrick when he drove the snakes out of Ireland. Hitler is the opposite of a saint and can sing about potentially devastating things. I think something that is so effective here and a lot of other places is how much work he puts into the detail, making sure that you know that that is Ireland with clovers and dress, or making the snakes look a little evil. Every little thing contributes a great deal to a Cartoon and can be key in understanding one.

It is ironic that Dr. Seuss went on to write children's books because some of the cartoons he drew were not for people of the younger generation, although if you look carefully enough you can still see some traces of brutality/older generation stuff (end of plot).

War Plan

I'm not sure what most people think about when they think of how WWII was conducted, but you can get a look at a top secret, well I guess not anymore, letter from Adolf Hitler to the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces.  Included are details about where and when the war is conducted, and what Hitler sets as rules for what Germany can and can't do.  Hitler made sure that he retained control in the war and he made sure that a lot of Germany's possible war movements were under his strict control.  The letter addresses different countries and what their roles are in the war, as well as how they should be treated considering neutrality vs. possible reactions against Germany.  Hitler has different plans for the Navy and for the Army and has stationed each in a different position in the countries best interest, offensively or deffensively.  

He ends his letter with:  "Preparations are to be made for attacks against the British mainland, bearing in mind that partial success with insufficient forces is in all circumstances to be avoided."  Which could mean that he thinks that he should attack Britian seperately.  The fact that Partial Success isn't an option probably means that he wants a big force behind him and complete victory.

Quick Note:  The link is from a Gale Database so I'm not sure if it will work everywhere.

Who is in Control

To me, a lot of what is and has been going on has to do with who is in control over who and how they are using that to their advantage.  For example, Hitler tried to influence and use/control the youth of Germany as a big part of his supporters.  He could target the youth because they are at a time in their life where they are wondering who they are and are forming their own opinions and therefore can be influenced if good opportunity presents itself.  For younger people, it is really important to be accepted into a group so that you are not alone.  The Nazi party presented that opportunity.  The opportunity for the younger people to be with other people who all share the same leader and ideals.  Young People are also the future, (like the song "Tomorrow belongs to me" in the movie Cabaret that we watched) and if you can manage to control them, then you have a huge step up in controlling the future.

 

Similarly, the Taliban recognize that the younger people, girls included, are the future, and if they go to school and get an education, they can pose a threat to the Taliban whether through education of others, or becoming organized against them.  You can already see this from the New York Time documentary where the girl was speaking out against the control that the Taliban has over their school-going.  They are trying to establish their power by showing that they will carry out their beliefs/orders that the girls shouldn't be in school.  As we have seen so much throughout history, the powers usually try to make an example out of someone so as to warn the others.  The girls though have taken this warning and basically stepped on it refusing to stay at home.

Both Hitler and now the Taliban were trying to contain the people that they were controlling making sure that there could not be anything that could lead to future uprisings or threats to their power.  Both groups used fear and weren't afraid of things getting a little messy.  The difference now from Hitler though, is that the girls have shown a tremendous strength and most have gone back to school instead of living in the contained fear.  Fear only works on the weak-spirited, and these girls back in school are showing that they are determined and could very well be the threat that the Taliban is trying to get rid of.