Contemporary America

The website I have chosen which typifies contemporary America for me is the Fox News website. For me, this is a good example of what makes Americans the way they are today.

Websites for news channels, and their 24 hour repeated news shows are the result of people in today's world wanting to be able to access the news at any hour of the day, wherever they are. People want to know what is going on, and don't get me wrong, I think it's a good thing that people are wanting to find out more about the world that they live in, and to stay up to date with current events, but sometimes I think that this is taken to the extreme and is not a good thing.

The reason I chose Fox News instead of one of the many other news websites around is because of the extreme right wing bias that Fox News have, and they represent a large quantity of today's America.

Hurricane Katrina [Catch-Up]

The website I have chosen to do my Hurricane Katrina blog on is Katrina.com, a website which encourages people to "do all the good you can, in all the ways you can."

This website is devoted to helping out the victims of the families who were struck down by Katrina, and all the other people whose lives have been affected by it. There are places on the website where you can go to donate money, or simply for people to share their stories and advice.

This website does not focus so much on the accusations of prejudice within the Bush government when the Hurricane hit, but encourages people to come together to help each other, rather than blaming each other for what happened. And that is a message that we can all take with us through life.

Religion and American Identity [Catch-Up]

The religious group I have chosen for this blog is the Church of Scientology. A lot of people have heard of Scientology (mostly thanks to some of the big stars like John Travolta, Tom Cruise and Peaches Geldof) and think on it with scorn, however most people don't really know all that much about it.

Their website is laid out very well, and is very easy to use. You can tell that they have invested a lot of time and money in to it, I guess in the hopes of dissuading people from their original beliefs that Scientology is more of a cult than a religion. However, like *nearly* all other religions in the world, Scientology is all about making you a better person, and about helping others. Are those truly the acts of a cult?

But how does Scientology represent faith and American identity in the modern world? Well, one very relevant aspect of it in today's world is that you have to pay a fair amount of money if you want to advance within the community, after all, you don't get something for nothing.

Scientology is causing a lot of debate in America at the moment, and I fear that the issue is one that will never truly be settled. While free will and free thinking is prevalent in the country, there will always be some argument between people about how they should behave, or what they should believe in.

American Declinism

This article is written by a man named Josef Joffe, who, amongst other things, is a co-editor of Die Zeit - a popular German weekly newspaper.

He argues here that America is, in fact, not declining - or at least nowhere near as dramatically as is often made out. Joffe suggests that "it is decline time in the United States" "every ten years." And so far, at the end of each cycle, America remains "first on any scale of power that matters." While he accepts that "the breathtaking rise of China is at the center of contemporary worries," he thinks that their rise in power has only started so vastly in very recent years, and that there is no way for it to be sustainable for them.

In this article, he makes a very bold suggestion as to one of the reasons that the United States will always be in "a league of it's own," and this is that America is the only country in the world with both the will, and the means to "intervene anywhere on the planet." Joffe thinks that America, like Europe once was, "is a warrior culture," and it is this that allows them to be the "default power, the country that occupies center stage."

Saunders - American Psyche [Catch-Up]

The article I have chosen for this blog is about China's "liberation" of Tibet. In this article, Saunders appears to express a view which is pretty different to that of the international community at the time. While I enjoyed reading all of Saunders' articles, I found this one to be particularly interesting.

I think that he is being very sarcastic in this article. When he says that "It would be a great tragedy if the sight of a few gentle monks bursting into uncontrollable tears of anguish caused us to abandon the Olympic ideal of international brotherhood." it appears to me that he resents the fact that even though all those people in Tibet died, hundreds of thousands of people will still flock to China and spend millions of dollars there.

He agrees that there is a time and a place for forgiving and forgetting, but in this case I believe that he is upset by the fact that the American people seem to be able to do so as easily as they have done.

American 'Declinism'

Is America in decline? Has it been in decline? These are questions that many ask and debate with eachother over small events that have happened to have occurred over the last three hundred years of American history. Some argue that, especially recently, America has overstretched itself by going to Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention the many other countries that American troops are already stationed in under Humanitarian aid. The defence budget for America is averaging at 900,000,000,000 dollars. The rest of the worlds defence budget combined is more or less the same.
http://rationaloptimist.wordpress.com/2008/06/30/american-declinism/
Frank S Robinson a self proclaimed rational optimist, Humanist, and classical nineteenth century Liberalist, believes that America is not in decline. In fact America is an exceedingly rich country that is financed by its exceptional productiveness. Robinson does not seem to be worried with the ten trillion dollars worth of National Debt that every minute gets added to. He seems satisfied in the knowledge that the productiveness of America will keep it forever afloat.
Even with the mounting costs of the pension, healthcare and social security and the fact that he himself acknowledges that the national GDP is $14 trillion with up to $95 trillion being spent on the previous expenditures alone. This does not matter because according to Frank S Robinson, (who incidently sells ancient coins for a living after retiring from being a judge), all the tax that is taken from the citizens would more than pay for these expenditures from the State. If cuts need to be made then it would only be the people who wouldn't miss the 'free benefits' that would lose out.
This is a typical view that I have come to find whilst researching American declinism. The American people are so entagled in their own way of life that it does not occur to them that there is no real need for these massive expenditures. It has not escaped my notice that the defence budget rose considerably after 9/11 in foresight of the attack on Baghdad. The new Healthcare bill that was pushed through by the Obama Administration will be another burden on the tax payers, which at the time of writing this article Frank S Robinson had no knowledge of. Many of the people of America were enraged by this policy, however it would be more beneficial than many of the drains on the countries finances.
What I did find astonishing was the acceptance that America may not always be exceptional. Robinson states "And someday, China may become more powerful than the US, and maybe even richer too; but that won't be the end of the world either... America will not starve..." I found this slightly against the grain, for on one hand he is arguing for America not being in decline, however, in many Americans eyes they are at the top, surely if they were to be overtaken by China that would essentially be America in decline?
It seems to me that he is trying to cover his bases and in the mean time he is contradicting himself in a rather amateur fashion.

Decline is a choice

When typing 'American declinism' into google I found the site Urban Elephants with a blog by Herb London, he believes that declinism is a choice and America can choose whether to stay in it or get out of it. He mentions that China and Japan provide 50% of money lent to the US by foreign investors, but he feels that China needs America just as much as American needs them as they are relient on their trade policy with America.

http://urbanelephants.com/index.php/component/content/article/64/2343-examining-declinism.html

Herb also comments on America's education system stating that it is not up to standards with european schools and university who have brighter students in maths and science. Saying that 'Most young people are more likely to know the name of the “American Idol” winner than the name of the Secretary of Defense.' and that their ignorance could be one of the reasons why they are declining.

Herb feels that America can be restored again as Ronald Reagan did in the past, he had a different idea of what America should be and gave America back its power. From the amount of debt shown in the seminar on monday I did not see how that would be possible but this blog has made me see it differently as Herb says they did it once before they can do it again, it is their choice.

American Declinism

http://uncadarrell.typepad.com/unca_darrell/2010/04/march-20-niall-ferguson-and-american-declinism.html

This blog is by 'Unca Darrell', who sounds like my worst nightmare; 'Old. Conservative. Christian. In love with my wife, Texas, America, Western Civilization, and Jesus.' If that doesn't scream REPUBLICAN, I don't know what does! The blog begins with a small passage from an article written by Niall Ferguson for Foreign Affairs. Unca Darrell then offers his opinions and further posts opinions from Mark Steyn, Josef Joffe, co-editor of Die Zeit and Robert J. Lieber, who's article appeared in Foreign Affairs in 2008.

Ferguson's article is pessimistic (and rightly so) and concentrates on US fiscal policy and how it is America's downfall. He says that although the U.S debt will not be absolutely dire until 2080, the paranoia that is present in modern day America may make it much worse as it could only take one headline on a slow news day to bring everything crashing down. He comments that military expenditure would most likely be cut (should cuts be made) because 'unlike mandatory entitlements, it is discretionary. . . . . For the United States' enemies in Iran and Iraq, it must be consoling to know that U.S. fiscal policy today is preprogrammed to reduce the resources available for all overseas military operations in the years ahead.' He has a point, but I disagree that military expenditure would be the first to be cut. Obama has pledged that the Military budget for 2011 will be somewhere in the region of $721 billion and even though he said he planned to pull out of Iraq, that hasn't happened and even more troops have been sent to Afghanistan. So although we all hoped after nearly 10 years this would all end, the light at the end of the tunnel is slowly disappearing. But is it all doom and gloom?

Apparently not. Unca Darrell is optimistic, as are the other contributors. He agrees with most of what Ferguson says, but he believes that taking the optimistic route may be more beneficial. However I believe this is more like burying your head in the sand and the lasting effects of being so optimistic is only superficial. I think Steyn realises this but Unca Darrell, Joffe and Lieber are all of the viewpoint that America is still the world's number one superpower with Darrell boldly expressing that there is no other country that even comes close to stealing the USA's limelight. Unfortunately, Darrell doesn't seem to understand that America is no longer in a one horse race. China is coming up the rear, and quickly. Niall's term 'Chimerica' as discussed in the seminar group is a testament to just how much of a threat the Chinese pose. In the next 40 years will we be looking at Chinese films with English subtitles? Will all future exports (culture, sports, films, starts, music) be coming from East Asia instead of the USA? The aforementioned men don't seem to think so. We have to look on the bright side of things and remember that America has had two centuries of growth, not decline. They have seen through two world wars and a depression and yet they still manage to have a defense budget that 51% of the rest of the world's, they have some of the most prestigious higher education establishments with high success rates, and as Joffe writes: 'These advantages include America's size, wealth, human and material resources, military strength, competitiveness, and liberal political and economic traditions, but also a remarkable flexibility, dynamism, and capacity for reinvention.' The USA cannot be touched. Unless of course you have the attitude of Unca Darrell and complete lack of faith in your government; 'Still, it would be foolish to say our country cannot fail. And one way it could fail is by doing exactly what the Obama administration is doing now -- borrowing profligately from future generations, bankrupting them.'

So is America in decline? Watch this space.

"America's identity crisis is being fought by every one of us"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/oct/18/american-psyche
Here I chose the last column was written by George Saunders for The Guardian.

He wrote that 'Now is a kind of calm-before-the-storm moment here in America.' The storm he means the financial crisis. He wrote the 'American Psyche' for Guardian that was almost two years ago, but the financial crisis is still going on. He mentioned that they are in two wars. However, I think those two are the most importat, but their armies are in different countries of the world. His articles or works are more about satirical. He satires the contemporary society of America. In this last passage he mentioned a smart-mouthed kid in the back seat of the car making fun of his family. What is the relevant between the financial crisis and those two wars? People who care about it? They just want to live in peace.

I found a vedio clip that probably is about that 'smart-mouthed kid', but I am not sure. If not we can still watch it, it is really funny.

Perfection American Style

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2007/sep/15/weekend7.weekend1


To begin with I would like to comment on how much I like George Saunders work. Although I have to say (and rather in eloquently I might add) that the short stories in In Persuasion Nation are some of the most disturbing words I have ever read in the 17 years I have been reading books. Seriously! I was shocked and appalled by some of the material because it so obviously relates to contemporary America. And that frightens me. Even more than Bush and Sarah Palin did.

George's articles in The Guardian however are completely different and I thoroughly enjoyed reading through them to find an article to comment on for this week. So the topic is Perfection and how well the Americans embrace it and to some extent abuse it. After reading the article, one realises two things; we all strive to achieve perfection in one form or another and Americans (in particular Britney Spears) are willing to inflict this on their infants. I can only assume that she would want to whiten her child's teeth because he is an extension of her and therefore must remain perfect at all times. They don't call it La-La Land for nothing.

The article is slightly reminiscent of the first of the short stories in In Persuasion Nation, 'I Can Speak!' A disturbing story, it is written in letter form and details how a company have invented a mask that fits onto your baby's face and allows it to 'speak'. You really have to read it to understand what I'm saying. But this is the issue Saunders is talking about. The contemporary American fights for perfection. Children from a young age seek to grow up so quickly to become the perfect girl, trying to emulate their Barbie dolls or little boys wanting to be like their favourite sports star. And parents so eager to mould their child into the perfect off-spring, eliminating any flaws that they had themselves. It seems that no matter what age your are, it will never be enough. Saunders himself was nearing 50 at the time and was trying to straighten his teeth! America is almost the motherland of cosmetic surgery, whether it be liposuction, breast implants or cosmetic dentistry. The never ending stream of media images that portray the latest in 'self improvement' have become the new fashion of the 21st Century. A notion that Saunders mocks, and quite right too. As he notes, each nation has their peculiarities. Apparently us Brits are scrappy in times of hardship. Americans on the other hand see something nice and think: can we make it better? I don't believe such a statement is so apt, so perfect, than that to describe America today.

Here in America we are experiencing a wave of superhero movies.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/aug/23/5

The article I chose is about the amount of superhero films being released in America. George speaks about the recent films released discussing the heroes powers which he believes really aren't real powers, but America looks up to these heroes and with the tragic terrorist attack of the world trade centre America seems to need a hero more than ever. These films are depicting a world that American citizens want to live in so they can feel protected and safe but the reality is that these heroes aren't heroes. For example George portrays Batman as a man that just has a lot of money, and then compares him to the "Typical man", "the complainer" and the "Sexual remark guy". I think what George is trying to say is that if the characters in these films can be superheroes why can't a "Typical man" as they all start off as ordinary people.



The recent release of 'Kick Ass' is a good example of this, as it is about a boy who decides to be a superhero but who doesn't actually have a power. Everyone wants to be a hero with powers, but the real heroes are the fire fighters who rescue so many lives and the policeman working everyday to make the country a safer place to live in.

The perfect planet and a bag of puppy excrement

George Saunders is a write who is known for his stories that are often satirical aswell as having a moral meaning. The short story of 'In persuasion Nation' seems to be made up of events that have no meaning, not to mention making no sense whatsoever, however, by the end of the story, not only does it make sense, but a moral meaning has been put across and all is understood and parallels made between the reality and fiction. The same can be said of the weekly columns that he wrote for the Guardian up until October 2008.
http://http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/may/03/healthandwellbeing
This column entry at first does not seem to make alot of sense. He talks of a beautiful day and the delights it holds. All the while holding a bad of dog poo and a dead half eaten fish. He states later in his column that if he meets someone who sees all this wonder, then he wants to say 'you are only seeing partly, you blind bastard.'
This is very true in the sense of the United States of America for go to be astounded by this magnificent place with miles of natural land and amazing architecture. The first thing you find when you arrive is an airport. When you eventually step out of the Airport, especially in a big city such as New York, you will be met by pollution and many many people, all rushing around to get to where they want to be. The buildings may be majestic, but they are also dirty and covered in pigeon poo. This I must say is an image collected from different TV programs such as friends. But when thinking of an American City such as New York, the amazement and the dirt walk hand in hand. The way that Saunders describes the spring with a bag of poop in his hand reflects that all is never perfect. That is in the literal sense, the dog poo can also be seen as a metaphore for all that is wrong with America. The generic advertisements and consuming people. In a land that could have been as diverse as they claim to be, their own wish to expand has made them the dog poo hanging from a tree in an otherwise pretty park, the blind may not see it, but when summer comes that bag is going to stink.
The message that Saunders puts forward is not overt. It is subtly beneath his words, in the image that he creates. A fact that I find rather amusing in regards to George Saunders is his hatred of the Image World that the United States has created, but they way that he puts his complaint forward is through the use of Images. Even so the image of America that I recieved through this article is that all is not pretty in the Land of images, if you look with your eyes and not your indoctrinated heart then you will see the dog poop hanging in the maple tree aswell.

This tribute video towards those who died in 9/11 is more of a part of the propaganda engine to justify the War on Terror. On first watching the video it is obvious that whomever made the video believes the United States of America to be a special nation above reproach and with strength that is unmatchable. The video briefly focuses on the pain and magnitude of 9/11, but the War on Terror that the the video seems to be promoting takes up more of the video time, it is a reply to the highly televised event that killed almost 3,000 people.
This tribute is not to those who died, but to those who live and die in foreign lands a Nation back, that may have had nothing to do with the attacks.
9/11 was an attack on Americas freedom and democracy, and so the War on Terror was a liberation from tyranny. This video tribute shows the height of the United States view of themselves, especially the creator of the video. It shows the complete denial of all that is wrong with this country, the hubris that the United States has. The words of the song echo this hubris "This is a righteous cause so without doubt or pause I will do what my Country asks of me." The land of the free is also the land of the narrow minded, those who believe that their way is the right way with no leverage.
To add to the theory that the United States is a State above the rest, filled with noble people, the first line of the song which is played in this 'tribute' are "Oh, the cowards came by morning and attacked without a warning." First of all is the notion that someone is going to attack but beforehand send a message saying 'by the way I have three planes heading your way to blow you up, hope its no inconveniance'. Added to this is that the writer of the song called the plane hijakers cowards. Surely although it is a shameful act to take the life of another, it had to take courage to board a plane that you knowingly would never leave in one piece. It adds to the notion that America is a State above the rest. The bombing of Iraq was not cowardly, it was brave, however anyone against America is a coward.
This video is not a tribute to those who died in 9/11, it does not deserve such a title. It is more of an abomination, an insult to those innocents who died that fateful day.

Alternative views of the 9/11 event....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8087731387167650121#

This is one of many alternative "discussions" of 9/11.
JB.

In memory of 9/11...

Almost 9 years after the tragedy on September 11, 2001. There are always someone in somehow to commemorate victims and the day.



Perhaps there are some people so-called "terriorsts", and some people who lost their families may hate them very much. Therefore, the United States invaded Afghanistan, which made more innocence people dead. Most of people around the world prayed and felt pity when American people were suffering the painful. However, after they invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, there is no one think they were weak and worth to compassionate.

That was the dreadful day in the history of the United States, and it did change people's live.

9/11

The video I have chosen shows the plane crashing in to the building from many different perspectives, using news and personal footage. The video also uses the footage of the man jumping/falling off the building I found this extremely hard to watch, and to know that he was someones father or son is heartbreaking. Towards the end of the video it shows the aftermath of the attack, this footage must of been taken straight aftet the attack as there is still smoke in the air. I think the song used in the video is by linken park and definitely helps show the sadness and devistation of the footage. At the very end of the video the quote "Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato is shown, I completely agree with this statement and feel that it sums up 9/11.

I remember when I found out about the attack, although I didn't hear till the end of the day when I had finished school and my dad told me and my brother to turn on the news channel. I was very young so it didn't hit me as hard as some but as I got older and grew to realise what terrorism was it did hit me, especially when I was shown the documentary '9/11' by the two French brothers at college.

It's a scary thought that this could happen again and maybe to the United Kingdom next time, I remember how scared I was when the London bombings happened as my dad works in London and to think that could happen again but twice as bad is terrifying.

09/11 Looking down

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jLLZ5E_vx0

This video isnt like so many of the others i have seen while researching for the obvious reason that it shows you post trade center images of fireman at the wreckage. But what the fundamental difference is the video's ability to let you imagine the disaster from a rare angle. I realise that its footage from before the incident, but from all the "tribute" clips almost all are from ground level or distant vantage point. Whether it is Pre 09/11 or not, to see from inside the W.T.C fills me with calm and un-nerving fright, as it allows you think ' I know what is goin to happen'.
Due to overwhelming or inconceivable numbers of Youtube tributes to 09/11 the thought of what it was like before is lost to the events of that day and the reaction in the aftermath which have surpassed or superceded any idea of the W.T.C on 09/10 or 09/09.

(Ignore the images of the scout, the Star Spangled Banner at Iwo Jima and pearl Harbour because I cant figure out the link between the three that give a unified message)

To me this Video tributes the determined rescue crews of the DireDept, Ambulance, Police and many other everyday pedestrians who gave their time and effort. Many videos define what is missing, what the W.T.C represented (E.g. to terrorists the symbol of freedom) to Americans and the effect of its absence. the .W.T.C was a part of the image that represented New York, a side from the Statue of Liberty or Empire State Building. It rocked public emotion.

Ultimately this clip shows the scale of the disaster from a different perspective, it doesnt show you what people on the saw that day, it shows what the unlucky inhabitants saw instead.

9/11 Commemoration

The commemorative video that I have chosen uses the song Shine Your Light by Robbie Robertson. This song was also used in the film Ladder 49 which tells the story of a group of firemen and the bonds that form between them.

This film does not focus on what happened after the attack, and the subsequent war on terror, rather it tells us the story of the firefighters who were involved in the rescue and those who lost their lives doing this. Photographs are used in this film, rather than video clips, and while this may not initially seem to have such an impact on us, it does have the effect of making us stop for a minute or two to think about the individual people who are in the pictures, and how their lives were changed.

This video remembers 9/11 as a tragic day in history, a day that changed millions of lives around the world.

Dedicated To The Victims of 9/11, The Brave Firefighters And All Their Loved Ones

This has got to be the most tragic blog. Even just looking for videos brings horrible memories as a 12 year old flooding back. I had been in the States on holiday not 3 months before and when I went home for lunch that day, the last thing I expected my Dad to say as he watched CNN was that the Twin Towers had been hit by terrorists. Now believe what you like, maybe it is all a conspiracy and the CIA and the US Government have something to do with it, but it doesn't lessen the magnitude of the situation. Thousands of people died that day, and whats more, people are still effected by it nearly 9 years on. Remember the scene in Michael Moore's Sicko? Some of the Firefighters are still suffering with horrific respiratory problems, and yet the health care system doesn't make it any better.

My video is a remix of Hero by Latino pop star Enrique Iglesias. I came across this a few years ago when trying to download the original version and this came down instead (obviously minus the video). I found it really difficult to listen to it because it was filled with soundbites from people who were in the towers, who had lost loved ones and who were just scared, all interlinked within the lyrics of the song. There are quite a few different versions of this on YouTube but I chose this one because it's just about the event, nothing to do with how bad Bush handled it or how it resulted in the current conflict in the Middle East.

It uses still photo's instead of video footage (which honestly, I find too traumatic to watch anyway) and has an old school movie look with the sepia effect, a nod to Classical Hollywood Cinema, something that made America great. I think having both Bush and Blair soundbites really emphasises the 'Special Relationship' between Britain and the US, and shows the solidarity between the two allies. I think the title of the song is very poignant as that is what many people were that day. It's a beautiful song and being so popular, many can relate to it. And as Enrique himself sang it on a television fundraiser, the song has now become synonymous with the events of 9/11.

As we discussed last week, Religion plays a big part in American life and I believe George Bush's closing words sums up the feeling across America at the time "Join me in saying a prayer for the victims and their families. God bless." I think we all said a prayer that day.

Sometimes in life, all we have are our memories. Whether they be in our mind, on film or in photo's. The events of that day defined a generation and changed the world forever. Any video that is made to commemorate that fateful day is a blessing because it reminds us what the world lost. We may not want to remember, but we'll never forget.

Religious groups in America - how would you explain these patterns?

The Presbyterian Church of America

Although in the United States of America the government and religion are seperate, that does not mean that religion and American identity are seperate. Infact many of the first settlers to America had fled there to be free of religious intolerance so they could pray and commit to their chosen religion in peace. http://www.pcanet.org/ The Presbyterian Church of America is a fairly new religious denomination in the United States as it was only organised in 1973. Since that time it has grown to include over 1,450 churches with over 300,000 members. Their official website goes into many details about the religious denomination including their beliefs, vision and 'what they are all about'. Through their vision it is rather clear that the Presbyterian church wishes to be entwined in all lives, not just those of the American Identity, for they state "The Presbyterian Church of America exists to glorify God by extending the kingdom of Jesus Christ over all individual lives through all areas of society and in all nations and cultures. Later on in the same passage they also state "We are committed to worship that practices the presence and power of God within the Church to the transformation of the surrounding culture through biblical application in population centres throughout the world." The idea of spreading Presbyterianism throughout the World is backed up by over 600 missions in over 60 countries. Clearly they are trying to represent faith as part of a global identity and not just an American identity. Through the faith of the Presbyterian Church is a generic faith, like all others that want to be the faith of the world, for they, apparently, only read the true scriptures that have not been defilled, but are written exactly the same as the first time that someone put pen to paper to write them. They have an education system for children through sunday schools, an idea that is not unknown and many and American child has gone to Sunday school, it is part of how many grew up. However, I wonder how many American citizens have come into contact with the Christian Education and Publications committee that is there to keep a watchful eye over women and help them learn what women should do through seminars and other such learning devices. The church does not seek political or civil careers, however they encourage their members to become a part of working society and reach great heights. Although they themselves will not play a large part in the politics of America, with a bit of encouragement their congregation plays a great part. They have University Professors and political people who all speak the word of Presbyterianism, infiltrating it through the cracks of the American Identity and seeding thoughts. They themselves said they were the fastest growing denomination in America. This religious denomination it seems, has the idea of the American Identity at its core, but it wants to branch out and make a generic people, where cultures no longer exist and everybody thinks the same way.

Mormon

The history of Mormon is not long, less than 200 years. The formal name of it should be The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However, it has become one the most important denominations in the United States or even all over the world. The basic beliefs of the Mormons and they called it "the Restoration of Truth". They believe that God is your Father in Heaven. He knows you personally. Jesus Christ is the Son of God and your Savior. His life and teachings are the way to peace and happiness. Here is the Mormon's official website: http://www.mormon.org/mormonorg/eng/ and http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=e419fb40e21cef00VgnVCM1000001f5e340aRCRD

I believe that every religion has a good porpose, they want people to live in the world better and better. But there are some radicals, they did this in a wrong way.

Evangelical Lutherans Church in America

I decided to look at the "Evangelical church of Lutherans in America" because I remember there being a lutheran family in the film Catch me if you can with Tom Hanks & Leonardo Di Caprio. Also I studied Me and Vicci studied Martin Luther last term in History.

Evangelical Church of Lutherans in America is a major Protestant sub-faith based with headquarters in Chicago Illinois. It is the largest Lutheran chapter or community in America (Missouri Synod,Wisconsin Synod) and apparently the Seventh Largest religion in America. The ELCA is a tri part system structure, what i mean is it has over 10,000 congregations with over 4.6 million Baptised members, 96 Synods (Dioceses) and the Main Lutheran Council.

#The Split to Moderate-left# Rationalism, Piety, Old and Neo-Lutheranism:***

The ELCA is geographically strongly centered in Upper MidWest America- Missouri,Illinois,Wisconsin,Minisota, but is a wide spread faith too.

What makes the ELCA distinctively American to me is their motto firstly,"Gods work, Our Hands" to live what they preach, it reminds me of the American characteristic of pragmatism. The Lutherans have a history of being strict and practical in their faith. In other words ELCA faith isnt just a sunday morning faith its an everyday faith.

Secondly they seem to be very open about their politics but somewhat unsure on where they stand as a comunal faith. Unsure on abortion or gender.

thirdly They are evangelical like many Protestant faiths and preach about the "Born again" anabaptism. Where newcomers find "Salvation from eternal Damnation" they live again. Similar to me with the new man/women notion in life where migrants turn a chapter to lead a better life, an improved them, fundamental given that Lutherans are all about migration.

Scientology- Cult or Religion?

Scientology- an interesting concept. Endorsed by once respected celebrities such as Tom Cruise and John Travolta, this Religion has become a source of controversy across the globe. Personally, I think it's an absolute joke. Although my personal opinion may come on a little strong, you may find that I am not the only one who thinks so. My website this week is the official Scientology website, but it gives us an insight into one of the most news worthy Religion's in the United States today.



http://www.scientology.org/



Founded by Science Fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology was established in 1953. It was basically considered to be a new form of psychotherapy as a technique known as Auditing was used to help council individuals. Auditing in lamens terms is digging up your traumatic memories of the past in order to be released from the damage to your life that it has caused. Often mocked for it's outrageous claims that psychiatry kills and that we have little alien spirits living inside us, it is sometimes debated as to whether this is a real Religion. Seen as a cult, some considerable donations have to be made should you become a member of this 'church' and it is well know that the more advanced in the the church you are, the more privy you are to the secrets that are unknown to the lower levels. Across the website it emphasizes happiness and what you have to do to achieve it, but without giving you any concrete information, it plays you videos with some relaxing spa like music and soothing images....it's almost hypnotic.



Now if this isn't ringing alarm bells with you, I'm not sure what will! If you were to compare this to Christianity, I suppose you could say that the closer you are to God and the Messiah, the more secrets are unlocked from the Bible. Now doesn't that sound a little strange to you?! It seems to me that only in America would you find a a Religion like this. Freedom to worship who and what you want, which I suppose is what faith is all about. Just because I think it's wrong, doesn't make it so. Atheist's don't believe in anything, but it doesn't make them wrong. I suppose America is more prone to producing gimmicky things like this and you start to associate the country and it's citizens with the weird and wonderful. I think Scientology is a great representation of America. It's become the new Kabbalah thanks to all the celebrities and all the news stories. It embodies how anything is possible and in the land of opportunity, almost anything can be successful. Even an alien cult that made Tom Cruise do this.....

Crash Crash

I have not seen Crash until the lecture, I know this is an excellent film and it's won many awards including the Best Picture of Oscar. I always want to watch this but I'm afraid I could not understand the complex relationship between everyone.

After watching the film, I have lots of thoughts, but I cannot express them very clearly. For example, the blake police officer, he seems really care about his mother, but he doesn't even know what his mother really wants. His motehr only wants her sons are safe and be with them. But he has never looked for his brother, until he's died. There are two police officer partners, one of them lookes very rude, but he saves others live in the end. And another one seems to be a hero, but killed a black youn man and ran away in the end. There are also many others like the locksmith and his family, the Iranian shopkeeper and his family, the reputation couple... There are a lot of people seem no relation between them, but actually they have been linked together.

The name of the film is Crash I think that means the crash between races, cultures and personality etc. I have many things want to say, but I don't know how can I explain them clearly. We are all the children of the God, and we, everyone is so small...

Crash

Firstly, I really enjoyed watching Crash, and thought that it was a very good film.

While I think that the film was succesful in raising many of the issues related to racism in todays world, I do feel that the directors made too much out of this aspect. I know that this is the main point of the film, but it must be remembered that like Foundas suggests, not every person in America is like one or another of those characters, and they are extremes at the different ends of the spectrum.

I related most to Ebert's review of this film, because as well as simply being a good film to watch, it also raised a lot of questions to keep you thinking for hours after you've watched it.

Not only is Crash an enjoyable film, but it also carries a strong message to today's world about progress, and the fact that while people may hold some beliefs initially, they can change, and become better people. I believe that it deserves all the awards it won, and many people dislike it simply because it beat Brokeback Mountain at the Oscars when it was not expect to.

Crash

I thoroughly enjoyed 'Crash' on monday morning I had not seen it before I'd heard of it, but did not know the topics the film dealt with as the title doesn't really give away what the film is truely about. I felt that the film did have a big impact on me and that it isn't just L.A that deals with these issues as I myself have seen people behave this way around different race, and feel that if these people saw this film maybe they would rethink their behavour.



Ebert praises the film when discussing it, he claims that he was fascinated by the film and felt that it pulls the audience in. I completely agree with him as I was glued to the screen in mondays lecture and gasping at every shocking scene. Everything Ebert had to say about the film was positive and he seemed to enjoy every aspect of it, he enjoyed that the characters were able to say what they wanted with being politically correct. This may be a shock to some but I too felt that it made the film and was brave of the director and cast to be involved in making this film. His overall summary of the film was that it was made to make the audience rething their way of life and consider changing the way they treat people of different genders and race.

Foundas on the other hand feels the complete opposite and feels that it doesn't accurately portray L.A as a city. He believes that there are no racists in L.A other than neo nazis and thinks that the plot of meeting people by crashing into them is ridiculous and very unrealistic as it has never happened to him in the whole time he has lived there. I feel that Foundas is very negative on the film but has a positive outlook on life and believes that he lives in a pleasant place where people have learnt their ways and are no longer racist, but this isn't the case. Foundas mentions that the screen writing is sloppy and the film is just here to remind us that white people suffer too. Again this clearly isn't the case as the film make the white people look bad and no where in the film are they forgiven for what they have done, they just learn the errors of their ways.

I definately favour Eberts outlook on the film and agree with his feelings towards the film. I feel that America needs more films like this to open up hidden problems the country is having, I believe that by using famous actors like Sandra Bullock and Hip Hop stars like ludacris has helped the film to be noticed and gained a larger audience because of them. If films that deal with touchy subjects like rascism did this the world may become a better place because of it.

Review of Crash

Crash is a film that has provoked controversy in Hollywood because of the nature of the topic. It is widely debated by critics, the most famous of which is the debate between Robert Ebert and Scott Foundas. Robert Ebert is of the mind that the film was the best of 2005 and deserved the Oscar that it won over 'Brokeback Mountain'. "It is a movie of raw confrontation about the complexity of our motives, about how racism works not only top down but sideways, and how in different situations, we are all capable of behaving shamefully." This opinion is attacked by Scott Foundas who believes that Crash is "one of those self-congratulatory liberal jerk-off movies that roll around every once in a while to remind us of how white people suffer too.." he then goes on to state that the characters are not three dimensional and live a life that is not of planet Earth.
Two very different reviews, the one to which I relate to the most is that of Robert Ebert. I found that he managed to capture the meaning of the film in his article. The story may be that of fiction, but within it is the essence of what every person holds inside them. A prejudice to that which you are not. As Ebert so eloquently phrased it "these people say exactly what they are thinking, without the filters of political correctness." This is especially true of the Free World nowadays. Everything that happens is judged, from that even more prejudice seeps in to you through your pores. The films that are shown portray lives that are not the same as the one you lead, and so become a stereotype that circulates through your brain everytime you see someone who may fit that description. The perfect example is that of Sandra Bullocks character who judges on a first glance. We are not told the previous experiences of the characters, but the likelihood is that Bullocks character does not have a history of interacting with Latinos.
Another aspect that I find to be extremely compelling is the hidden prejudice that bubbles under the surface without your knowledge and then erupts in a spray of sudden emotion, leading you to do deeds that no-one would have guessed would have been in your nature to do, such as that of Ryan Phillipes character. All the characters combined portray the major prejudices that people feel and show. Haggis puts forward the prejudice in the human psychology.
Away from the characters, the film is constantly placing the viewer on edge. The characters are unpredictable. It is more of what a real life is like, and not the generic, girl meets disadvantaged boy, hates him, falls in love and all is happy. It is a story of understanding what kind of person you truly are and who you have been.
The intermingling of the characters adds to both the suspense, for you can see the chain of events that would occur if one small act was to happen, such as that of the hispanic Michael Pena giving his daughter his protective cloak and then staring his own death and that of his daughter in the eye. For that split second that the viewer thinks that that small girl is dead, you see the shopkeeper who sold the gun to the Iraqi man, followed by the wrecked shop and lack of insurance. Then if the Iraqi had killed the small girl, would it have been shown in the newspapers to be an Iraqi Murderer or would it be a more mundane title?
That is what the film has running through it, endless questions of what if this happened? What if he hadn't stopped the car? What if Don Cheadle had tried to find his brother?
The film is not meant to be a light hearted film of love and oppurtunity, but the underlying nature of human society. To me it shows the answers to the human soul and it may be controversial but it is a reminder that prejudice is always there and every little act reverberates through society and affects everyone in small and different ways. Because of this every muscle in your body is tense with anticipation and worry for what a character will do next.

American Immigration & economic fortunes.....

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-kaye23-2010mar23,0,5809816.story

Did you pick up this article on immigration from the LA Times?
Published today it has some useful background facts and views on the multi-cultural scene on the west coast and ties in closely with some os the issues raised by 'Crash'.
Look forward to more thoughts on Wednesday - good wishes,
John

My Crash Review-Controversy

I had not seen Crash before monday despite it being released in UK cinemas' in 2005. The film stunned me and I rarely felt like I knew what was coming next, it wasnt that predictable for me which i feel is a one of the biggest dangers facing these type of scenario films. I think Crash shows a worst case scenario built on racial prejudice, stereo types where general reputation precedes itself, extrodinary co-incidence that shows a story that comes full cirlce. However it is none the less a haunting reality of everyday life where situations occurr by chance and the storys of individuals told are intertwined.

With the world we live in today, given contemporary global issues, touchy subjects, insecurities etc... The film Crash is a bould move by Paul Haggis given the former concerns. I think the casting was unbelievablely good in choice, many of them I think are underated in the past and present, I agree with Ebert on the "strong performances". The level in popularity of the film I believe is largely based on Crash's confrontation with the contemporary issues addressed in the film; such as racism, ethnicity, image/identity and prejudice. Also it is dependant on the audiences and critics views on the delicate issues and their comfort to this exposure.

I didnt get a sense of being minipulated by the scenarios' or the characters' therefore I dont recognise too much controversy myself. I thought the film was farely seemless but still able and did leave questions in my mind. Furthermore the film did make me think, but I disagree that the film is so that you can only watch it once, afterall that theory can apply to many films, however I believe that argument is beyond the point. I think the construction of the narrative is also well done but im not saying that I think the film is untouchable.

Im mainly agree with Ebert rather than Foundas, the film does make me watch with the feeling of "Intense Facination". I am attracted by the way the character behaviour depends so much on "accident". I like the way in which the characters' assumptions of each other are shown. Crash attracts me and I agree with Ebert that the film shows characters saying ".... exactly what they are thinking, without the filters of political correctness" I further agree that the film serves a deeper meaning than "manipulative storytelling", more a parable on morals and behaviour. On the otherhand I have to disagree with Ebert where he states that the characters become "better people because of what has happend to them".The state in which the film leaves some of the characters is far from ideal in comparison to others. Even though Foundas disagrees with the way the film was made or the message it percieved, I have to agree with him in saying that Crash is not wholly representitive of the people their views or behaviour and the social problems in contemporary L.A. However Like Ebert I believe that Crash is a film about progress I would add that perhaps this can be seen as a subtle message that Haggis wants to see implimented with the films contentious issues in todays wider society?

Overall I would agree it could be one of the best films of 2005, personably Crash is an enjoyable yet thought provoking film.

Crash- A Thought Provoking Celluloid Masterpiece

So Crash received praised from Roger Ebert (the American Barry Norman, if you will) and was deemed the worst movie of 2005 by 'new kid on the block' Scott Foundas. Personally, I'm inclined to side with Ebert because I loved it. As a recently former film student, I've learnt to appreciate the power of the cinema a little more and I felt this was a perfect example of one of those films that has you talking about it for days after and really thinking about the content. I understand the arguments in both Ebert and Foundas' reviews, but I can't help but wonder what Foundas was expecting from the film. The way he talks about how racial inaccurate the film was, you would think that he was watching it as though it was a documentary about downtown L.A. Clearly the concept of artistic licence is lost on him. I wouldn't ever believe that director Paul Haggis set out to change the world with this film. The simple fact is that people had a bee in their bonnet because Crash won the Oscar for best motion picture over Brokeback Mountain, which obviously means that the Academy is full of homophobes because they decided not to vote for a film about gay cowboys! Ok well it's Friday night and I'm given a choice at Blockbuster. Do I want to rent Crash or do I want to rent Brokeback Mountain? I pick Crash, so does this mean I'm a homophobe? Umm, no! So why all the controversy? I've never been to L.A so I can't say what it's like in real life. I can tell you how it's represented in movies. I can tell about the reputation of the LAPD, but can I say for sure that everyone is a racist in L.A? No, of course not. How could anybody possibly know that? But what Haggis has done is taken some of the underlying tensions of modern day L.A and put them up there on the big screen. And I think that has made a good many people uncomfortable. It's like the elephant in the room, and it was just put up on a 20ft screen.

Maybe it was a wake-up call. It's not exactly unknown that the bigger studios prefer not to touch subjects such as racism. I can't ever imagine MGM producing a musical about the KKK in glorious technicolour. Is there such a difference between Foundas and Ebert's reviews because they are from two different generations? I think so. Ebert obviously comes from a generation that remembers first hand the civil rights movements of the 60's, but Foundas is of the generation that has read about it in books and has been taught about it. Obviously Crash is about modern day racial tension, but it is the underlying history that is the cause. The LAPD are infamous for being a violent and racially motivated police force. Evident in not only this movie but also in another Oscar winning film, L.A Confidential (1997). Although set in the 50's, the same racial tension is apparent and the violence of the LAPD is a large part of the storyline.

As far as being termed 'racially insensitive', you cannot deny the conclusions that people jump to when looking at skin colour. This happens all over the world. What this film teaches you is that appearances can be deceptive. The Latino 'homie' who turns out to be a family man, the racist cop who is the sole carer of his sick father, the TV-director who isn't considered 'black' by his colleagues, the two black guys who look like college students but are actually car-jackers...they all have their stories. Granted, portraying the Persian shop-keeper as a raving lunatic may not have been the best way to go but think about it in terms of his frustration. If you lived in a foreign country where you struggled with the language and were targeted because of your race, your heritage, wouldn't you be angry? And the fact that the American gun shop owner incorrectly calls the Persian an Arab is telling of the ignorance that is all too common.

I don't believe that Crash would have worked as well if it had been set in New York. It's too European and it's too crowded. As Don Cheadle's character talks about at the beginning of the film, in any real city you brush past people and you bump into them, but in L.A nobody touches you. You could interpret that in so many ways. Is it fear? Is it trying to avoid a further clash of cultures? Is it the basic fact that you need a car to get to anywhere in L.A? It's not something you really think about in a city as racially diverse as New York. NYC could almost be seen as 'immigrant central', there's a different kind of feeling being produced from L.A. Almost as if it is 'true' America because that's where the 'new Americans' were headed after they colonised the East.

I think this film really made people sit up and think. Hollywood so rarely does that nowadays. Big budgets and special effects over take everything. Crash had a budget of $6 million and was filmed in 36 days, yet has a cast that is enviable by any standards and was therefore able to bring in the audiences. Although Crash is six years old, it's still relevant today. The ever growing wave of Mexican immigrants is becoming a bigger issue, tensions over the new President and his skin colour are still cause for concern, the Western World seems to have a continuing hate for people from the Middle-East....so the film world was divided over this movie. Like it or not, it won awards and rightly so. It may manipulate the audience but I think the mark of a good film is that it has the ability to draw you in and put you in that kind of situation in the first place. These Hollywood film reviewers might have the legions of fans and accolades but I know when I enjoy a film, and I know that I agree with Mr Ebert.

WEEK 6: Tutorial

Dear Maria, Sarah, Vicci, Lucia, Gaff & Michael,

Thanks to everyone for an interesting range of posts. The nature & content of the websites themselves confirm some of the issues that face all tribal groups; there is a simple belief that they can preserve and mantain an Indian identity and that their values about "mother earth" and heritage etc. will ensure their survival as separate "nations". But is it feasible? If their language dies - and thus their oral history - can they have a future? Can tribal membership be "proved" and thus sustained? Are casinos really a secure source of tribal identity?
Many questions and, perhaps, only one negavite answer for all. It is hard to predict what the future holds for this small (c.1%) but important minority. That's why characters such as Sherman Alexie, Ward Churchill, Winona Laduke amd Russell Means are significant voices. So, is it acculturation or assimilation as a future?
Here is the website we saw briefly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfsNM1igcYk&feature=related

Have a good week.
Good wishes,
John

Native Indians in America

http://www.seminoletribe.com/


I have chosen the seminole poeple as my first example, because ive been to a reservation and it was really quite something. The Big Cypress Seminole Reservation

http://www.swampsafari.net/


"Today Gaming is by far the number one economic enterprise in all indian country"

The tribal HeadQuarters is based in Hollywood, Florida, where they have a hotel and cassino complex. It seems much of the income for the seminoles like many indians is from gambling and tourism.

Looking at the website it seems the Seminoles are very proud of their history, where they came from is even part of a title on one page. But the webpage has links of timeline, geneology and future which suggests to me that the value of their roots and who they are matters just as much today if not more so.
The seminole believe they are an unconquered nation, and the fight is not against soldiers but against the courts, to maintian a sense of self and not to be conquered by obscurity and uncertainty of the present and future. The situation today is the issue of preserving their culture and preventing it from being lost within todays wider society and away from the "economic mainstream", stating that self-relience is a todays priority.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.mohican.com/index.htm

What with Last of the Mohicans being a favourite film of mine I've chosen the Mohicans as the 2nd example. Not quite as impressed as the previous website but just as interesting though.

I want to know how they live having been put under the microscope of Hollywood and its reputation for producing glorified in-accurate interpritations now and then. Going of the Website it seems that these Mohicans are a little bit more flexible in their attempt to be ecconomically stable, in the sense that they dont seem to be a tribe that relies on the gambling economy or tourism either.

So a difference to the Seminole, the website shows their is a Mohican LP Gas company, they have convience stores, golfcourse owners and RV parks. That not to say there isnt a cassino, there is, but there are other things. Which i find impressive given that it seems to based on this small Munsee-comunity of Stockbridge.

However in the history side link there is information about a great migration that Mohicans endured to Wisconsin via Indianna, as opposed to the Hollywood story of a dying breed much later than their supposed date of extinction. The Mohican history is actually one of great financial focus besides a huge migration that is so common amongst Native Indians.

Native American Tribes

The first website I found was for the Chickasaw Tribe in Oklahoma. On their page you can learn about their history and about the Chickasaw Tribe in today’s world.

They do not go into much detail about the history of their tribe they say little more about their early encounters with white people other than that they “conducted a successful trade business with... the French and English” and that they sided with the English in the French and Indian War. It then briefly mentions how they were relocated during the Great Removal to where they are now.

Like their history, they don’t mention much about the present day situation of the tribe. However, they do encourage people to come and “try your luck” at one of their multiple casinos, showing that they are taking advantage of their situation in the modern world. However, they also express a desire to “preserve our heritage of history, language and culture”, and so keeping their traditions alive.

The second website I found was for the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California.

They say even less on their website about their history than the Chickasaw Tribe did, simply stating that they once lived a nomadic lifestyle before settling around the Lake Tahoe area which was “directly in the path of explorers, immigrants, and gold-seekers.”

Again, like the Chickasaw Tribe, little is mentioned about their situation today. However, we can see that they too have built a successful new lifestyle based on the tourist trade and on the gaming industry.

With both Tribes’ websites, it is difficult to find any mention of the struggles that they have been through in the past, and which they are still going through today. On both of these websites, they talk mainly about the politics of the modern day, and of elections for new Tribal leaders and the like.

The Cheyenne Sioux Tribe and the Nez Perce Tribe

The United States of America used to be a land that was inhabited by the different sovereignties and nations of the Native Americans. They have since been exterminated or more recently pushed into Reservations but are still recognised as having a sovereign power. These Reservations are spread around America many of which incorporate more than one tribe. For instance the Cheyenne Sioux Tribe is the combined Cheyenne tribe and the Sioux tribe.
The Cheyenne Sioux Tribe in South Dakota has a website that seems to lean towards the more traditional ideas of the Native Americans. http://www.sioux.org/land_flash.php . When you first enter the website traditional music is played and the background is a stereotype of what many think of as a Native American way of life. The website holds many aspects of the Cheyenne Sioux tribe. the information on their history is not very detailed with explanations of the buffalo and then the conflict with the 'white man'. In the explanation of the battles with the 'white man' the writer seems very detatched from their own history. It seems to be more a series of events that could have happened to anyone, than an event that shaped the way they currently lived their lives. The only time I really felt any emotion eminating from the author was when they questioned the right of the 'white man' to escape religious persecution in Europe, only to persecute a new type of religion in the New World.
The tribe also includes some a more contemporary aspect in the form of their Tribal Government, Cultural Preservation Programs and their Education. In the tribal Government no internal information is freely given, instead names and titles are told with the districts mapped out. Some secrets are left as secrets for a kind that had lost much.
The Cultural Preservation Programs is much more forthcoming. The information given is the paperwork for the cultural ordinances, outlining the language and education of the people within that tribe.
The lack of information about their internal politics and the openness of the ordinances suggests that the Cheyenne Sioux Tribe is an independent people that are trying to allow others to understand them and yet they will not let all parts of their ideology and philosophy or politics be aired to anybody.
The Nez Perce Tribes website seems to be more 'hip'. http://www.nezperce.org/
Information about the events of the tribe are freely told on the home page of the website, including their census information and their election process. Pointing to a more democratic view of the Native Americans than stereotypes suggested, or an incorporation of the United States government into their internal political spectrum.
The website seems to be more of what one would expect a state website to appear. The members of the committee have pictures on the site along with the date that their title expires; All the different departments have their own page and when it comes to history, the factual parts such as the repression of these people is not told. Only tales of how the flag came to be are shown within the site.
The layout of the Nez Perce tribe in comparison to the Cheyenne Sioux tribe is that the Nez Perce tribe seem to be trying to incorporate themselves into the American society and social norm. They do not bring up the touchy parts of history when they were almost wiped out, instead they embrace the democracy that was introduced to them from across the seas. The tribe even has primaries for its elective process. Whereas the Cheyenne Sioux tribe is trying to hold on to the tradition and values that it once had, and remember the time when they were an indangered people, although with the way the author writes, that is a time that is either draining from a collective memory or simply ceasing to be a concern in a land that doesn't care about another the natives of the land.

Native Americans

For my blog this week, I decided to look for tribes whose names I am familiar with: The Cherokee Tribe and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe.

http://www.cherokee.org/

The Cherokee Tribe has several different divisions but for the purpose of this blog I will be concentrating on the particular division who run the website and they are located near Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Unfortunately for the the Cherokee Tribe, they were involved in a particularly dark period of US history, specifically the infamous Trail of Tears. Originally the Cherokees were located in the Southeast (Georgia, Northern Florida and the Carolina's) but in the 1830, President Andrew Jackson authorized the Indian Removal Act and in 1838 more that 3,000 Cherokees were forced out of their homes and off their land and carted off to reservations where many were were held in the prison camps that awaited them. Many thousands died from starvation and disease among other ailments. This is the tragic history that the Cherokees have to live with and many Americans feel guilt over.

Cherokee Nation is very much a modern site and obviously tries to focus more on the positive things. The news feed on the home page talks about how well the tribe is doing and all the success they are having at the moment and it is a very clear cut and well managed site. The Cherokee Tribe are the largest tribe in the US today with an estimated population of 300,000 members, and were known in the 19th century as one of the 'Five Civilized Tribes' meaning that they were one of the few tribes that somewhat assimilated and accepted the European culture that had influenced America. Clearly this is still the case today as they seem to a more 'modern' outlook compared to my other website.

The history section is extensive and encourages those who are not in the know to look through the articles. Even going so far as to list all the Treaties that were made, history is obviously an important point, no matter how broken or tragic it is. I believe that a lot of the website may be aimed at the children of the tribe members and possibly those wanting to become a member. I enjoyed looking through the site and I believe that they are one of the 'success stories' of the Native American Peoples.

My second website focuses on the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of South Dakota. On their website they explain that their 'Lakota Nation is comprised of over three million acres with three major waterways including the Missouri River, the Cheyenne River and the Moreau River. The Cheyenne River Reservation is home to the four bands (Tiospaye) of the “Titunwan” People of the Plains: The “Mnikoju” Planters By The Water, “Owohe Nupa” Two Kettle, “Itazipa Cola” Without Bows, and “Siha Sapa” Black Foot.'

http://www.sioux.org/land_flash.php

After the defeat of the Lakota people in the 19th Century, the Great Sioux Reservation was broken up as a result and thus the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe was created. The population of this tribe according to the 2000 Census was an estimated 8,470. Unfortunately, they do not live as well as the Cherokee Tribe as due to the US Government confiscating their land and then damming the Missouri River for electrical power and flood control, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe have restricted access to water making living conditions unbearable in some places.

An interesting side note I'd just like to mention here is that a recent weather related disaster that deeply effected the tribe echoes Hurricane Katrina in that the US Government was extremely slow to respond, despite the fact that a state of emergency was declared. It wasn't until it was specifically highlighted on a television programme that the rest of the US were made aware of it and within two days donations were made. Although no deaths were recorded, the people of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe were without water, heat or power for at least two weeks.

Looking at their website, the Tribe chooses a traditional look rather than a modern one that perhaps reflects their feelings towards modern America and the 'outside' world. The background is a landscape view of what is presumably one of the rivers that runs through their land and tradional Native American music is played along with pictures old and new of who I assume were tribe members. Under 'Our Story' they are keen to point out that it is one that cannot be described in just a few pages on a website. I find it interesting that in their history section, instead of writing their own history, they prefer to give a small blurb and then refer you to other websites (including the God of information, all hail Wikipedia!!) which suggests that maybe they do not have the man power to maintain the website and include all their own information. It's obviously a very small website that tries to keep up in the current market, but compared to the Cherokee, it fails in trying to provide awareness and information on their tribe. Perhaps it is because they are one of the smaller tribes and do not live as well as the Cherokee, but at least they have made the effort and even if they cannot provide their own story, guaranteed that someone else will.

Native American Tribes

www.klamathtribes.org/culture/

The first site I found was for the Klamath tribes, Klamath, Modoc and Yahooskin in Oregon. The site has a page for their history which contains information about them from the 19Th century. It mentions their first interactions with the white people, these were explorers, missionaries, settlers and ranchers. It discusses how they left their marks but does not go into detail with the only bad mention of them being 'After decades of hostilities with the invaders, the Klamath Tribes ceded more than 23 million acres of land in 1864 and we entered the reservation era.'. It then goes on to discuss their eagerness to turn new economic opportunities to their advantage and had much success in the cattle industry.

The information on the present on the site talks about how they are still serious about achieving economic self- sufficiency as they feel this is a way to control their own destinies. I found that there is not much information on the present and how their tribe is surviving today, it mainly focuses on what their missions are "The mission of the Klamath Tribes is to protect, preserve, and enhance the spiritual, cultural, and physical values and resources of the Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin Peoples, by maintaining the customs and heritage of our ancestors."




www.snowwowl.com/peopleinuit1.html

The second site I found was not for a specific tribe but for the 'Inuit' people living in the Arctic. The site is very focused on the success of a place called Pond Inlet (Mittimatalik), Baffin Island, Canada and the business' based on the island, it is also very proud of its national park. It also mentions the changes that have been made to their way of living and how they've had to modernise themselves to survive. It then goes on to talk about how the change of economy on the island has led to some Inuits being unemployed, or becoming suicidal and gaining addictions which has been a big problem for the island. This is not mentioned in the first tribes website I found and shows the difference in success and failure between tribes. I then looked at the history of the Inuits and it seemed strange to me that they only mention the positive side to their history, there is no mention of the struggles they went through considering how it has led them to many problems today.

I feel that these sites should go into detail about their struggles as many Americans are not knowledgeable about the subject and should be informed of some Native Americans situations.

Native American

The Native American have lived in there for a long time. Long before those settlers arrived. They have always lived insular life, until the arrival of the invaders destroyed their peaceful life. Most of them have no place to live and they have no work to do. However, the society has continued to develop, and they---the Native Americans also need to change, need to take advance with times.

For example, I found a tribe on a website called Native American Nations, there is a tribe called Abenaki, and there is brief history of it. And then I found another website of it, the same tribe, but they have produced products in present day.

Here is the link of Natice American Nations: http://www.nativeculturelinks.com/nations.html there are many tribes on this website, I chose the first one. And this is the link of Abenaki: http://intertribal.net/NAT/NATribes.htm http://207.234.249.26/index.html

And also I found a vedio clip that's about President Obama to Meet with Native American Tribal Leaders. He has invited leaders of the more than 500 Native American tribes in the United States to a White House Tribal Nations Conference on November 5. Mr. Obama says he wants to hear directly from the leaders about how his administration can help them meet their needs. Those people's wished are very simple, they just want to live a little bit better, but those aggressors have never stopped destroying, no matter hundreds years before or now. If the Native American lived in tipis, just like they did before, they can easily live like they used to---hunting, farming, and they wouldn't need money they wouldn't need jobs, everything would be fine.

Here is the vedio clip:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duSwtNhlaYc

Here's the voice of political reason...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8abrIQ_v2w8



Are all the answers here? Or is this the more reasonable reflection of the issue?....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKMgPN_ZR




Or this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLCJohGfFno

PRO & ANTI Latino America Immigration

At last Wednesday, 3rd March, there is an article posted on Center for Immigration Studies, it called Calderon's Latin American Initiative: A Few Concerns. Calderon is the President of Mexico. He and Jorge Bustamante (Mexican immigration scholar), they made speech. Bustamante states, "I'm not against seeking a Latin American brotherhood, but I am against confusing facts with sentiments." He notes that "millions of Mexican citizens live in the United States in conditions that require our attention and active solidarity. From them we receive our second largest source of foreign currency, which sustains the national economy." Bustamante goes on to say that Mexicans "can't afford to exclude from regional alliances the country with which we have our largest border" and a major economic relationship. He says that to make such observations is to be "neither pro-gringo nor anti-Latin American. These are simply facts of our reality, which the president of Mexico does not seem to be recognizing." Bustamante and the President of Mexico seem not happy with immigrants move into the United States. For the reason as I understand is if there are more and more people go to America, then there will be less and less people living and working in their native country. However, I think they should not complain that much, they should consider how to change the national policies, make their own country is better and more people stay.
Here is the link of the website: http://www.cis.org/kammer/new-calderon-initiative
There is another article also talk about PRO Latin American Immigration. http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/uslatin_american_relations_and_migration

For the ANTI Latin American Immigration could be both side. It could be one side of Hispanic and the other side could be the United States. For example, Mexico has a policy called "Southern Plan". “Plan Sur” (Southern Plan), announced by the Mexican government [on June 19], may already be underway. Over a period of 15 days, starting on June 4, the southern border of Mexico was the stage for a large-scale police action that resulted in more than 6,000 deportations of illegal aliens to Guatemala from Mexico and 3,000 Central Americans located in Guatemala back to the borders of Nicaragua, El Salvador, and neighboring countries. This is only the example. The other Spanish-speaking countries may also have the policies like this---encouraged people go to other Hispanic countries but not the United States.
Here is the link of the website: http://www.worldpress.org/0901feature22.htm