What I've Learned

Before this year, I think that my writing was argumentative, but I think that my thesis statements were not very strong and did not well represent my persuasive, argumentative writing. I think that this year I learned to develop more concise, argumentative,  and representative thesis statements.  This overall makes my papers much stronger and makes it easier to organize my evidence in a way that makes sense and makes it easy to read. I also think that I consistently provided too much background information and factual evidence before getting to my point. One example of this was in my paper about feminists this year. I had about a page an a half of unneeded background information. After cutting this, and reforming my thesis, my written paper was much stronger. This year my writing improved, but it was mostly my organization of my papers and making it concise so that it was easy to read and made sense, that improved. My ideas also greatly improved this year. I feel as though the things that we learned were much less factual and memorizing than history classes in the past. I think that our class discussions made me really think deeper into the surface of these historical events. Mostly I think that this new outlook showed up in my writing. One of the papers that I was most proud of this year actually occurred at the beginning of the year. We had spent time in class discussing current events and we had to write a paper linking some of these events into a common theme. The theme that I chose was ethnic nationalism. I think that this beginning of the year paper really helped me to think of history in a new way for the rest of the year, and the years to come. Before this class, I would have probably just read these current events off of my Yahoo page and absorbed them, but not thought much about them. Now I am able to see connections between different things happening in the world at different times and how these patterns have repeated throughout history. I think that this new outlook makes me appreciate history even more, and makes it a much more interesting class.

Different Tactics

       I think that when the Communist Party in China implemented the land reform program and the Red Guards, they desired both different results and had different intentions for each tactic. When they began to enforce the land reform program, they used it as a way to appeal to the greater Chinese population, of peasants and farmers. It was their way of saying "we are on your side" and "we want the best for you." It was their intention to appeal to the public and downsize the power of the current people of status. The result of this tactic was unity under their cause and trust in their ideas. When they implemented the Red Guard program, their intention was more to cause fear in people and show how powerful they could truly be. Their violence and enforcement of power upon the people shows that they didn't care whether or not the people wanted to follow them and comply, just that they were forced into doing so. The result of this tactic was fear, and fear supplied them with power. Fear was what made the people not content with their former government. After the new party appealed to them by seeming to diminish this factor of fear, they also stooped to ruling in the same manner. 

       While both tactics strive for the overall same goal, gaining the support and power of the people, they are quite contradictory to one another. The land reform program promises revenge and equality, downsizing the power of those who were previously vicious. The Red Guard then simply redistributes that power to an equally vicious party. That is why overall each specific tactic gained different results in terms of followers. Both did result in erasing the previous government and way of life, and leading to a socialist rule. But it seems as though the land reform program was used to soften them up, and then the Red Guards regained power through fear.

My Parent's Experience During the Cold War

Even though my mom was only about five or six years old, she has a few memories about learning about the Cold War in school. She recalls that in school they were taught about the freedoms banished within the Soviet Union. Specifically, the bans on religion and rights. She recalls that they were also taught about the fear that the US had of the Soviets having an atomic bomb. She remembers that some buildings had signs that read "Fallout Shelters" a place that one was supposed to reside if an atomic bomb was dropped. She also remembers that people were most afraid of Cuba because it was right off the coast of Florida. This was because Cuba was communist and its weapons were supplied by the Soviet Union. She remembers having Civil Defense Drills in school twice a year in which they had to practice walking home from school. This was to prepare for a time that children couldn't contact their parents and streets weren't open because a bomb was dropped or an air raid occurred. My mom also remembers at the age of about 30, watching the Berlin Wall fall on tv. 

        My dad recalls his trip to the Soviet Union in 1979-1980 in an exchange program. He visited Moscow and Leningrad. He met other college students that said that they occasionally got to read Newsweek and Time which surprised my dad. He remembers seeing few cars on the street because of their poverty. And he remembers the gross food that they fed him because of their lack of money. He recalls that his friends traded his Levi jeans for a bunch of collectables because the Soviets were unable to buy jeans. When he returned from his trip, they were warned that the Soviets were going to check their luggage to make sure that they didn't take anything that they weren't allowed to. He and his friends got nervous that they were going to take some of things they had bought. While they were in the Soviet Union, the Soviets had invaded Afghanistan and my father or no one else on the trip had learned of this until they had returned home. When my father was a kid during the Cold War, he remembers through his temple, sending Russian Jews religious items to celebrate their religion and money to help them get out of Russia and go to Israel.

Movies and Books- Africa and Middle East

Like everyone has said before me, I have not read many books or seen many movies about or by people in Africa and the Middle East. These were the few I could think of, mostly by looking back on other's posts.

Hotel Rwanda, Babel, Blood Diamond, Things Fall Apart, The Kite Runner

Reasons for Successful Oil Production

The map in the textbook highlighted the small regions in the Middle East that were the highest in oil producing. By looking at the topographical map, one can see that all of these areas are flat, and either next to a large body of water or river. I can think of a few reasons for this pattern. Oil is the biggest source of money and wealth in the area. This results in it being in great demand. If an area of land is rich in oil, then that land becomes in high demand. If everyone were to gravitate towards the oil, then there will no longer be any oil left, or it will cause chaos and slow the production. Perhaps, the reason that those areas are so successful in their production, is because they are protected by water. The water provides a secluded area to produce oil.

This can go hand in hand with what the book said about the population of areas with high oil production, the population of these areas is usually low. Because these areas are mostly flat terrain, the primary economy of the areas is probably agriculture. This would make the areas more rural and not as populated. Oil reserves are easier to maintain in a rural and lowly populated environment, rather than cities and towns. This is why small, lower populated areas produce more oil.

Tanzania

In 1967, the Arusha Declaration was passed making Tanzania a socialist country. Initially this reduced the amount of corruption and stabilized the government. Tanzania seemed to be better off than many other African countries. 

Even though Tanzania shared its wealth, their wasn't much to share. Inadequate soil and rainfall made agriculture a difficult center for their economy. The low resources have stunted the growth of the country and created much poverty both in urban and rural areas. 

Both malaria and AIDS are huge causes of death for Tanzania and this may result from their urban poverty. Their number of adult deaths is much higher than other African countries. Part of this could be attributed to their lack of resources ie. food. 

Arc de Triomphe Research Questions

Most of my research questions, about the Arc de Triomphe in France,  center around how the French people see the monument and the significance of the monument in French nationalism .

What events have occurred in history relating to the monument?

What do these events show about how the French feel about the arc?

What type of feelings does the arc convey within the French people?

Has is become more of a tourist site, or is it a more somber and reflective place?

How does the arc compare to the Eiffel Tower, in terms of conveying French pride and nationalism?

Do the surroundings or the location of the arc affect the overall feeling or purpose of the arc?

Does that fact that it commemorates many different wars make it even more important or give it even more weight to the French?

Overall, I want my thesis to express the importance of the monument to the French and the affect it had on French nationalism and pride since it was built.

Arc de Triomphe- A Symbol of French Pride

The Arc de Triomphe is a massive arc that is centered in one of the busiest streets of the already bustling Paris. Originally built as a memorial to those who died in the Napolean Wars, the monument has become a collective memorial to all of France's wars. In 1921, the Tomb of the Unknown Soilder was buried to commemorate those who died in World War I. As much as the site has become one of collective commemoration, it has also become a key landmark of French pride. Both the French and the Germans have held victory marches past the church and it has become a place of high nationalism for France. Which is why, perhaps, it can also be seen as a logical site for terrorism. In 1995, a bomb exploded near the site and wounded 17 people. Overall the monument has become a large part of France's national importance.

The Power of Language

Until I researched Frantz Fanton, I had never thought about what made me perceive different countries in the way that I did. I had always assumed that I judged different countries rightfully based on their ethnicities and cultures. I had never considered the power of language. If I had arrived on an unknown island and had seen people of a different color living quite modestly, I probably would assume that they were underdeveloped and uncivilized. If it turned out that they came up to me and started speaking in English, I am sure that I would begin to think higher of them and identify more with them. The fact that they spoke English didn't change the color of their skin or their modest way of life, but it would make me more interested in communicating with them and learning about the differences between our cultures. Perhaps it would be because I knew that maybe we had more in common than I thought because they probably had some connection to one of the large English speaking countries that I am familiar with.

My point is that language can really influence the identity of a country or society. In Fanton's book Black Skins, White Masks, he discusses his disgust in the way that his country accepts the French language and how this helps the French to maintain ownership of them as a colony. "A man who has a language," Fanon suggests, "consequently possesses the world expressed and implied by that language."  He continues to argue that not only does the fact that the French colonies adapt to the "mother" country by speaking French make them more part of France, but it also makes it easier for the French to rule them. I thought that this was a very different way of looking at colonization and I think that Fanton was right that French colonies accepting the French language helped the French to maintain dominance over their colonies.

Woman in World War I and II

During World War I, women did not have a huge place in their country's involvement in the war. Women did have many contributing factors on the war, but society limited their involvement. They were not part of the military but instead worked as nurses. They also filled in many jobs left open at home, as the men went to war. The amount of physical labour that women did increased, but these jobs proved to be temporary. In 1917 they were authorized to be in the Navy, but they couldn't advance in the field as much as men.

At the beginning of World War II, the same mindset of women being too feminine to participate in the military. After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, this mindset began to deteriorate as more and more manpower was needed. IN 1942, the WAAC bill passed allowing the establishment of Women's Auxiliary Army Corps. The WAAC could cover parts of the military allowing men to go to combat. Shortly after the Navy passed acts creating different sects of the Navy attributed to women. The lack of manpower forced people to let go of their reserves concerning women to participating in the military. Yet, women still didn't get paid as much or have the full military benefits as men. In 1943, The WAAC or the new version of the Women's Army Corps, was passed and gained women full military status. 

Between the two wars, the involvement of women was greatly increased. Even though initially it was because of a lack of manpower, woman became a vital part of the military forces. The involvement of women unified the US even more and helped every effort of winning the war. Woman were a crucial part of every country during both wars from the home front to the military.

Movies and Books about World War II

Movies:

Valkyrie- Tells of the plots that Germans from the inside attempted to execute to kill Hitler

The Reader- Love story about an older woman and a teenage boy in Germany. The woman ends up being put on trial for mistreatment of Jews while she was a guard at concentration camps.

A League of Their Own- Story of women taking over Major League Baseball while all the men were at war.

Atonement- Love story about two childhood friends in England who are separated and the boy is forced to fight in the war.

The Sound of Music- A family grows up in Austria during the war.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- A man grows from older to younger and is forced to spend part of his life fighting in the war.

South Pacific (musical)- Musical about soldiers deployed to the South Pacific during the war.

Books:

Atonement

The Sunflower

The Diary of Anne Frank

British Barrage Balloon Usage

Even though most of the countries involved in World War II's governments were primarily concerned with their advancement on the battlefield, the home front was also a major concern. After attacks on London, Britain wanted to protect key targets such as industrial areas, port cities, and harbors. In 1938 the British Balloon Command, a Royal Air Force Command in charge of barrage balloon units, was established. Barrage balloons were large balloons tethered to the ground with steel cables. The balloons could be raised or lowered to reach a desired altitude. The main purpose of the balloons was to prevent low altitude flying of enemies such as dive bombers. The balloons forced enemy airships to fly at higher altitudes which decreased the amount of surprise on the attacks and decreased the accuracy of enemy bombing. The fact that the cables forced enemies into specific directions and altitudes, made ground defense on the attacks easier, as the enemy airships were more concentrated. 

Now the year is 1941 and there are over 1500 balloons scattering the British skyline. Initially, the addition of barrage balloons to the British defensive plan seemed useless and unproductive. They were a hassle to construct, and the amount of the balloons directly and entirely effects the efficiency of the balloons.In 1936 when there were only 450 balloons in command, the efficiency and effectiveness of the balloons was minimal. Now that the effort has been put in to increase the amount of the balloons and faster productivity, the balloons seem like a strong and logical way to defend against German air attacks. The British mentality of how to provide defense against air attacks includes using every viable weapon, fighters, anti-aircrafts, and balloons. The balloons seem to be a important part of the overall plan of defense and are effective. Even if some balloons are shot down or struck by lightening, every possible attempt at defense seems worth it. The effort has been put into creating a specific command to deal with them and their creation has been increased. Logistically, they seem worth it to keep building and setting up. 

As for the mental aspect of the balloons on both the people of the home front and the enemy, the balloons seem to provide a visible, concrete attempt at insuring the safety of the British people, as well as a visible, concrete barrier to the Germans. If the Germans know that there are huge cables and balloons controlling their airship activity over Britain, it will decrease the chance of them launching attacks. If the British people know that the government is putting in so much effort to not only fighting the enemy beyond borders, but also defending them, they will trust the authorities more, unifying the country and helping them to win the war. 

Nuclear Bomb Documentary

I think that NBC aired this piece for both informative and commemorative purposes. Because it was aired exactly 50 years after the attack, it makes sense that it was aired in memory of those who died. There are interviews with those who experienced the attack and those who's lives were affected by it. There were statistics about how many died. In that way, it is clearly commemorating those who died. The documentary is not biased either for or against the US's decision on dropping the nuclear bomb. It explains in chronological order the process of the decision to drop the bomb. There are interviews from people from both the Japanese and American sides. The decision of dropping the bomb is still very controversial and I think that the documentary serves as something to simply answer questions on both sides. 

If I wrote the textbook

If I were to write my own textbook, I would have combined the Holocaust and the World War II into one chapter. The way that the book has it now, splitting the two into different chapters, makes it confusing to read and makes the content seem more factual than analytical. When the events are not in chronological order, the only way to write them would be to write directly what happened in facts. When they are surrounded by the events that came before and after, analysis between why what happened when and how is easier to make. If I were writing the textbook, I would put all of World War II, including the Holocaust, in chronological order. There is no reason to isolate the Holocaust because it is not a separate event. World War II happened because of rises of different Fascist regimes in Europe. World War II mixed with these different regimes and the mindset of the European people led to the Holocaust. Everything that happened in Europe had effects on the people and the rulers that led to the next events that occurred. They all happened because of each other and are all connected

The Holocaust is also a very hard to absorb part in history. It may seem like isolating it, by giving it it's own chapter,  shows the importance and weight of the event. But because, even with a large understanding and knowledge of the Holocaust, it can be difficult to understand why it happened and how anyone could let it happen, the only chance and hope that any students can obtain a remote understand of the Holocaust, is to have thorough knowledge of the circumstances of when it happened. By surrounding it with all the events that led up to it, it makes it seem as understandable as possible. Even though there is no remotely acceptable and logical explanation for the Holocaust, surrounding it with the circumstances that led to it is the closest way to giving it a logical explanation. I would call my combined chapter "Nazi Germany's Impact on the World from 1939-1945" Nazi Germany is at the center of every conflict and circumstance of both the Holocaust and World War II.

My Grandpa Eli's WWII Experience

My grandfather moved from Poland to the United States in 1929 at the age of 6. He lived in Detroit, Michigan and suffered through the Great Depression living in horrible poverty. After he became the only one of his three siblings to graduate high school, he started to work at a Ford factory in Detroit. He decided that he wanted to become part of the war and attempted to join the cadet program in the Air Force. This program was to become a pilot, a navigator, or a bomber.  After flunking the test to become a cadet, he went back to work at Ford. In 1942, the year after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, one of his friends approached him saying that he was going to enlist in the army. Being a Jew, my grandfather decided that it was time to enlist as well, and fight against Germany who was killing the large amount of family that he left behind in Poland. He suspected that had he not enlisted then, he would have been drafted within the nest six months. He enlisted in the Army Air Force and they made him a teletype mechanic. He claims that he was horrible at the job, so they moved him and he once again attempted to join the cadet program. This time he was accepted into the program. The final test of the program was the physical, my grandfather flunked the depth perception part of the physical and once again could not become a pilot. They then sent him to gunnery school to become a gunner, where he learned how to shoot from the b29 planes, the type of plane that dropped the atomic bomb on Japan. When it was time for his troop to invade Japan, they decided to keep him behind to be an aerial instructor in Nebraska. Towards the end of the war, they moved him to Washington state to then deploy to Japan, but right as he was about to leave, the war ended. My grandfather fought in the war to do what he could to save as many Jews as possible. He lost almost all of his family in the war.

Appeasement-Not a Good Solution

Appeasement is rarely the best way to solve a conflict. Rather compromise or discussion is a better solution. I fight with my sister very often. In order to resolve these fights we promise to do favors for one another. Overtime these favors build up and up until they rarely mean anything at all. Our initial fight was never resolved and continues to escalate. We keep pacifying the other with irrelevant favors that don't help anything. Perhaps if we discussed the fight with one another and came to a compromise it would be over. On a slightly larger scale, perhaps other countries didn't appease Hitler, maybe they could have stopped his eventual destruction. By attempting to pacify him rather than attempting a compromise, the "fight" escalated and turned into a war.

Propaganda- More Clever with Time

I found that the propaganda posters during the time of WWII were surprisingly clever. They were full of rhyming slogans and satirical pictures that, instead of conveying the serious fear or intense nationalism that the WWI propaganda posters were aiming for, they seemed to be mocking the war. One of my favorite posters was one that said sugar is scarce, make it stretch. It was promoting the conservation of resources just as many posters wanted to do during the first World War. Yet, the silly picture of a stretched bottle of sugar makes you want to giggle rather than fear that food will run out. I think that one of the reasons that governments wanted to eliminate the promotion of fear and nationalism, is that they saw it as an outdated tactic and it wouldn't work again. Obviously no one wanted another war, especially so soon since the other war. In the first war it was easier for people to fight for and have pride in their country because they all had hope that they would win and that it would be short and fast. After the lengthy war, people knew not to have such great expectations. People weren't naive enough to invest themselves in another war. Governments stopped promoting nationalism and instead tried to make people laugh. Perhaps they thought that it would downsize the looming of another World War.

After World War I, people couldn't be feeling too happy with their country. The pride felt before the first war just wasn't there. Through propaganda posters, governments were just trying to get people involved as many different ways as they could. Nationalism obviously was no longer an option, and fear was outdated, so humor seemed to be the last chance.

A Tormented Childhood Leads to a Life of Anger

Obviously, Hitler wasn't a fun-loving, young child when growing up in  Austria-Hungary. After reading an article from the New York Times analyzing the connections between Hitler's dysfunctional childhood and his actions later in life, it is quite clear to me that much of Hitler's crimes against humanity may have never occurred had he had a different home life. The article goes on to explain that Hitler grew up with a violent father who often beat both his mother and him. This combined with Hitler's confusion about his sexual identity, gave Adolf a fear of weakness. Even though there was resentment towards his father for the pain that he caused both him and his family, Hitler always looked up to his father's masculinity. There is no way that Hitler's lack of self-confidence and low self-esteem were simply coincidences based on how his life turned out. His struggling artist stage was him embracing his more feminine and sensitive ways. When that failed, he gave up on embracing himself. He wanted to prove to himself that he could be tough and strong. After being bullied his whole life, it was his turn to bully. And that he did. Hitler wanted a masculine identity, no weakness, no failure. He got so caught up in proving to himself that he could be an authority, and that he could be a man, that he ended up changing the world for the worst. So can we go as far to say that if Hitler's father had spared his wife and son of a beating, that our world as we know it would be without World War II? Possibly. 

Parallels Between the Taliban and the Nazis

We study the fascist dictators of the early 20th century in a very simple-minded way. When we read about them in our World History book it truly makes them along with all of their ideas seem like: history. In our country, and specifically where we live, we see no trace of these ideas. But, the truth is that these ideas are still present in the modern world. The Taliban in Afghanistan are a modern example of a fascist group. By living in the United States and learning so much about the destruction that these reigns of dictators caused, it is clear to us that these ideas are not only morally wrong, but also unproductive. In the U.S. we are lucky to be able to practice a number of freedoms. We have a very powerful, stable, and democratic government. It would be nearly impossible for a fascist group to turn Americans off of the democratic government and on to them. In countries such as Afghanistan, it is the polar opposite. For many people, the Taliban seems very attractive. The government is unstable and distrusting. The Taliban provides a stable set of laws and an alternative to the unorganized and unproductive government. Sound familiar? In early twentieth century Germany, the economic troubles combined with the unstable government made the Nazi movement look promising. Both groups started and gained followers in the same manner. Many of their ideas are also very similar. They both value the traditional lifestyle of woman in the home (demonstrated by the story of the girls getting acid thrown in their faces when attempting to attend school) and violence and fear to gain followers. The Taliban have not gone as far as the Nazis, trying to limit the world to one race, but who's to say that eventually they won't. When we look back and learn about the enormous amount of terror that the Nazi party bestowed upon the world, we have to remember that history has a way of repeating itself. Let's not forget that at its early stages the Nazi party was simply regarded as an overthrowing of the communist government.  To paraphrase a character in Cabaret: They will overthrow the communists and then we will take over. Who's we? Germany.