Vietnam Memorial Websites

http://www.thewall-usa.com/information.asp http://www.answers.com/topic/maya-lin
http://www.dailyushistory.com/AB/Vietnam%20Veterans%20Memorial.htm

Dinesh D' Souza

Dinesh D’ Souza was born on April 25th, 1961 in Mumbai, India and moved to the United States 17 years later. This allowed him to have two perspectives on the United States: how the people of the United States view themselves and how others view the United States. All of his life, he tried to see both sides of the story. As discussed in this article, Dinesh first thought that Bin Laden was a “a dark-eyed fanatic, a gun-toting extremist, a monster who laughs at the deaths of 3,000 innocent civilians.”, but after finding out what the Muslim community thought of him he changed his perspective to Bin Laden being “a quiet, well-mannered, thoughtful, eloquent and deeply religious person.” We usually do not see both sides of the story due to the media having a biest opinion of the story. Dinesh talks about other things that we might view as radical such as: September 11th being our fault, the government having “domestic insurgents” such as Hilary Clinton and Ted Kennedy, and other things. He has been known, however, to mess up facts. I believe that what Dinesh D’Souza does is right. The first thing he does is get two different perspectives on a story and only then judge the event or people. This is how our history class tries to gather information. We find the beist of the source and only then take what the source says as a fact.

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.

Dinesh D'Souza

In his debate with Daniel Dennett, Dinesh D'Souza argues the reason why god is not just a man-made invention. He also argues that this universe was not only created by god, but created by god for us. His main point is about how even modern science points towards a creator since so much of it is based on exact numbers. If these numbers were shifted even slightly, we, humans, would not exist. He then uses this point to say that god created this world essentially for us and our survival. While such exact results may argue the existence of a creator, they do not necessarily support D'Souza's argument that the universe was created for us. To me, it seems that it instead supports the idea that we developed to survive in this quantized world especially since the rest of the scientific evidence shows that humans are a fairly recent development in the universe. His argument seems strong, since he uses science to support it, but it seems that he outright ignores (with the exception of darwinism) any scientific evidence that doesn't support his beliefs. Is he saying that only certain parts of science are valid?

Besides that, while he provides a valid argument against the idea that god is a man-made invention, he provides no such argument against the idea that religion is a man-made invention. Much of what he says seems to agree with the belief that religion is something made up by humans to insure various things like power and a functioning society. He discusses how Christian morality is necessary by using examples of atheist regimes like the Nazis and Mao to show how many have died that the hands of atheism. He talks about the blood-thirst and sacrifice that plagued the world before Christianity, which to me shows that Christianity rose simply to stop this and better human society. Morality is simply a man-made idea, and religions based off of it came about as a means of propagating it. There is no reason that atheists can't be moral as well; he just chose very extreme examples of atheists that had little value for human life. For him to say that atheism is immoral is the same as an atheist saying Christianity is irrational. Both statements are stereotypical, prejudiced, and bigoted.

There may or may not be a god, this is up for debate, but I found Dinesh's reasoning as to why there must be a god compelling. But his argument for religion is lacking and shows that Dinesh is not as understanding as he appears at first. He may use science to back his arguments, but all of his arguments are laced with prejudices. These prejudices that both religious and nonreligious people have against the other are causing a lot of disagreement today. People like Dinesh who take things to the extreme just help deepen this disagreement that cannot be solved without compromise or a new outlook on the world.

Franz Fanon

Frantz Fanon, one of the biggest intellectual supporters of de-colonization, sought to figure out how psychopathology affected - and was affected by - the process of colonization. What was interesting to me about this, was that I found that his mentor, and one of his life's greatest influences was Aime Cesaire.

Aime Cesaire, a descendant of African slaves who lived most of his life in Martinique, was both a Communist politician, and a re-knowned poet and writer. More impotantly, he, and others, founded the political and literary movement known as "negritude," which was the equivalent of the Harlem Renaissance that took place in the United States. Negritude is especially apparent in one of Aime Cesaire's plays, La Tempete, that is essentially a parody of Shakespeare's The Tempest. In it, Cesaire uses African culture to ridiculize and mock the sense of entitlement the Europeans had to the rest of the world.

The most interesting thing about negritude and Frantz Fanon, though, is that Fanon was able to use this idea of ethnocentrism on the European's part, and cultural retaliation on Africa's part, when dealing with patients in Algeria. Fanon eventually became a psychiatrist, and developed his own version of negritude: that human consciousness is based in racism and racial differences.

Using this idea, a translation of one of the principles of a literary movement to psychology, he was able to identify many "mental illness" as simply problems that arose due to racism, and repression. And this, in turn, definitely helped the cause of decolonization out, and was able to raise awareness of the bad effects decolonization had on peoples all over the world.

Frantz Fanon

We all know about how Franz Fanon thought education was most important, and later using his education to help educate people about what he faced in life. But, only some know about how the arts such as music and contemporary art are used to remind use about Franz's life. For example, a new age metal band "Rage Against the Machine" references Franz Fanon to help enrich the imagery in their music. "Grip the canon like Fanon and pass the shell to my classmate", Rage Against the Machine uses the Reference of Fanon to make the connection of the violent insurrection in our world today. Also, another modern band (C.I.A) uses Franz Fanon to bring up what Franz advocated in his book "Black Man, White Masks". "I bring the sun at red dawn upon the thoughts of Frantz Fanon, So stand at attention devil dirge, You'll never survive choosing sides against the Wretched of the Earth." Not only do we see/hear Franz Fanon in music, his ideas were portrayed in art. For example, Jimmie Durham, an American Indian conceptual artist created a painting called "Often Durham Employs" which points to Fanon's references to colonialism. Jimmie Durham later commented on the painting saying that Fanon's quote saying "The zone where the natives live is not complementary to the zone inhabited by the settlers" was wrong and that his people faced the same conditions and hardships that Fanon did when the Native Americans were driven from their lands. Mainly, we see the ideas and philosophies of Franz Fanon in our world today.

Franz Fanon

Although I agree with Robbie that Franz Fanon is very bias and believes that africans are the only ones that are colonized, I believe that Fanon presents a lot of valid points. One thought of his that I agree with is that when people are colonized by foreign rule, they take on the foreign culture and lose pare of their own. Similar to India when the East India Company took over, the foreign country that is imposing rule (England in this case) teaches their language in schools and slowly changes aspects of the countries culture to make it more like their own. This leaves the country being colonized no choice but to conform to these changes and deal with them. I can see where Franz's anger comes from because it is very difficult giving up everything that you believe in for something that someone else forces you to believe. It is especially hard because as Franz says, French....which identifies blackness with evil and sin, showing that the French though that the Africans were horrible and much worse than themselves. It would be harding trying to adapt to a culture in which your people are the epitome of evil. Therefore although I don't agree with everything Franz said, he did have valid arguments on a lot of his views towards colinization.