Here is a link to a good article that deals with social class, race, immigration, etc. all in one.
alien commuters
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Even though as individuals we might work consciously to not be racist, we live in a racist society with a racist history. From the moment we are born we are influenced in an around about way to think of white as good and black as bad. Look at these examples from various media. They are not trying to be racist, but the message they send reinforces racist ideology.
These pictures though very similar, are different in two important areas: the race of the people and the caption.
LeBron James is one of the few men to be on the cover of Vogue and yet, he is portrayed as an angry gorilla.
Read this article that is full of implicit bias and then checkout this post showing that Jewish players were dominant in basketball in the first half of the 20th century. And another example of implicit bias is how people react in a split second when they confront someone with a weapon. See here for that.
Monday, March 17, 2014
Animal Farm Roundup
So you have finished the book "Animal Farm." I would like to test us on our ability to connect Animal Farm to some theories we have discussed in class.
The first theory is the Conflict theory.
Using examples from the book can you tell me who is the Bourgeoisie and who are the Proletariats?
(Include references at the beginning, during, and end of the book)
Who ended up winning the power struggle at the end of the book?
The second theory I would like to connect with is the Functionalist theory.
Using examples from the book can you tell me what roles needed to be carried out and by whom.
What performances deserved and received higher rewards? Who performed these roles? Had the animal's society reached a healthy balance by the end of the book?
This is worth 30 points and therefore will be graded based on the precise examples you provide and by showing me that you can connect the book with the theories and sociology in general-especially the class system. Social class, social stratification, deviance, reward systems, Marxism, capitalism and so forth are all found in this book. It is up to you to convince me that you can connect all of this together with examples/characters in the book.
The first theory is the Conflict theory.
Using examples from the book can you tell me who is the Bourgeoisie and who are the Proletariats?
(Include references at the beginning, during, and end of the book)
Who ended up winning the power struggle at the end of the book?
The second theory I would like to connect with is the Functionalist theory.
Using examples from the book can you tell me what roles needed to be carried out and by whom.
What performances deserved and received higher rewards? Who performed these roles? Had the animal's society reached a healthy balance by the end of the book?
This is worth 30 points and therefore will be graded based on the precise examples you provide and by showing me that you can connect the book with the theories and sociology in general-especially the class system. Social class, social stratification, deviance, reward systems, Marxism, capitalism and so forth are all found in this book. It is up to you to convince me that you can connect all of this together with examples/characters in the book.
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Survivalism has been dragged back into the news lately with details about the ‘prepping’ done by Nancy Lanza, Adam Lanza’s mother. Adam Lanza was the shooter in the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting if you remember. His father has also been in the news lately saying how he wished his son "had never been born."
So the term "prepping" and "prepper" are terms commonly used on the show Doomsday Preppers. Nancy Lanza was a big fan of this show.
Of course, most people watch the show as a form of entertainment and view the people on the show as "extreme." Why would anyone feel the need to store hundreds of gallons of water, food for many months, stock pile guns and ammunition, and etc. In fact a little research has pointed out to me that not one of these people even call themselves a "doomsday prepper," They also dislike the term survivalist. To them the term survivalist reference events such as the Ruby Ridge incident in 1992, the Branch Davidian Complex (1993) and the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing of 1995. Survivalists tend to be viewed as anti-government, white supremacist, violent individuals or part of militant groups.
People that consider themselves preppers on the other hand want to be viewed as government supporters, non-militant, promoting race equality and so forth. Basically, all they want to do is train people how to be prepared for worse case scenarios. They try to acquire skills that will help them-which may include firearms training.
So, the question is: does having firearms training, firearms, and some extra food and materials in your home make you a threat to your community?
My answer is simply: maybe. If your mindset includes overthrowing the government or prejudice then you may be a threat. If you are a racist-then possibly.
Organizations like the International Red Cross, Homeland Security, and FEMA instruct individuals on how to put together a bug-out bag and how to make a plan in order to organize your family or community in the event of a disaster. A person can go to Costco and buy a "doomsday" package for roughly $10,000 that includes food, water, and various supplies to help you survive a disaster.
So why does it seem that every time there is a national tragedy, does the prepper get stereotyped?
The gun owner is envisioned as a prepper, and the prepper is envisioned as a frightened survivalist. The economy goes into a recession, you must be prepared. Global warming is a warning of the apocalypse.
What does it say about our society that we use this "subculture" as a scapegoat? Why does a reality show such as "Doomsday Preppers" even have a following?
So below is a episode of Doomsday Preppers. It is titled "We are the Marauder's." It shows that there are people out there that plan to take what Preppers have stored for themselves.
And stay tuned for my future blog on the Zombie Apocalypse.
So the term "prepping" and "prepper" are terms commonly used on the show Doomsday Preppers. Nancy Lanza was a big fan of this show.
Of course, most people watch the show as a form of entertainment and view the people on the show as "extreme." Why would anyone feel the need to store hundreds of gallons of water, food for many months, stock pile guns and ammunition, and etc. In fact a little research has pointed out to me that not one of these people even call themselves a "doomsday prepper," They also dislike the term survivalist. To them the term survivalist reference events such as the Ruby Ridge incident in 1992, the Branch Davidian Complex (1993) and the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing of 1995. Survivalists tend to be viewed as anti-government, white supremacist, violent individuals or part of militant groups.
People that consider themselves preppers on the other hand want to be viewed as government supporters, non-militant, promoting race equality and so forth. Basically, all they want to do is train people how to be prepared for worse case scenarios. They try to acquire skills that will help them-which may include firearms training.
So, the question is: does having firearms training, firearms, and some extra food and materials in your home make you a threat to your community?
My answer is simply: maybe. If your mindset includes overthrowing the government or prejudice then you may be a threat. If you are a racist-then possibly.
Organizations like the International Red Cross, Homeland Security, and FEMA instruct individuals on how to put together a bug-out bag and how to make a plan in order to organize your family or community in the event of a disaster. A person can go to Costco and buy a "doomsday" package for roughly $10,000 that includes food, water, and various supplies to help you survive a disaster.
So why does it seem that every time there is a national tragedy, does the prepper get stereotyped?
The gun owner is envisioned as a prepper, and the prepper is envisioned as a frightened survivalist. The economy goes into a recession, you must be prepared. Global warming is a warning of the apocalypse.
What does it say about our society that we use this "subculture" as a scapegoat? Why does a reality show such as "Doomsday Preppers" even have a following?
So below is a episode of Doomsday Preppers. It is titled "We are the Marauder's." It shows that there are people out there that plan to take what Preppers have stored for themselves.
And stay tuned for my future blog on the Zombie Apocalypse.
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
GlobalPost
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
Advertisement
Find the Perfect College
ADVERTISEMENT
Old Major's Dream
Symbolism, Imagery, Allegory
The Happy Meal
Old Major's dream is a stand-in for Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto.The Sit-Down Meal
Animal Farm opens with the news that old Major, "the prize Middle White boar" (1.2), has called a meeting to share a dream that he's had.Wait, come back. It's not your usual "let me tell you about this crazy dream I had last night." It's a little more, "I have a dream": Old Major's dream is about equality. He tells the other animals that "Man is the only creature that consumes without producing," and he encourages them to "work night and day, body and soul, for the over-throw of the human race" (1.9, 11). In short, he explains that men have been taking advantage of them for years, and that it's time for the tyranny of man to end. His message? "Rebellion" (1.11).
In other words, Old Major's dream is a simplified version of the Communist Manifesto.
In 1848, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels published the Communist Manifesto, which laid out the basic principles of what we now call communism. The basic idea of the Manifesto was capitalism was seriously flawed. The workers never saw the products of their labor because the capitalists—the people who owned the means of production (factories, land, etc.)—claimed the profit for themselves. In other words, workers grew the grain; the landowners took it. Workers made the chairs; factory owners sold them and kept the profit.
So what? Isn't that how the world just works? Well, yeah. Because we live in a capitalist system. (Most of us, anyway.) But Marx's point is that the landowners and factory owners don't produce anything. They might hold the deeds or buy machines out of their company's earnings, but they're not actually doing labor. For most people, that's not a problem—that's just the way the world works.
For Marx, it was a big problem and it led to massive exploitation of the workers. He said that if common workers could overthrow the capitalists and claim the means of production for themselves, then all the workers of the world could live in peace with one another. At the end of the Manifesto, Marx declares, "The proletarians [common workers] have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workers of the world, Unite!" Old Major essentially ends his speech the same way with his final call to "Rebellion!"
Problem: Marx and Old Major are better at criticizing the existing system than at proposing a new one. After the rebellion, the big question becomes: now what?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)