Global Thinking

"Globalization, as defined by rich people like us, is a very nice thing... you are talking about the Internet, you are talking about cell phones, you are talking about computers. This doesn't affect two-thirds of the people of the world." -Jimmy Carter

It can be scary to think that we are dependent on countries for something as vital as oil, but also scary to think of a world where everything cost immensely more because it couldn't be manufactured in countries where labor is so cheap.

The basic idea behind capitalism is that competition is good. It drives down costs, ensures quality, and offers a larger choice for consumers. Globalization would seem to be the epitome of this, as it not only allows for this competition, but also allows other nations to become real competitors in the global market.

As the chapter points out, globalization of the 20th and 21st centuries represented "an immense, rapid, and unprecedented creation of wealth with a demonstratable impact on human welfare. Life expectancies grew almost everywhere, infant mortality declined, and literacy increased. The UN Human department Report in 1997 concluded: 'that in the past 50 years, poverty has fallen more than in the previous 500'." Truly this is a momentous achievement.

However, the chapter also points out the darker side of globalization. The outsourcing of jobs, exploitation of the poor in many under-developed countries, and rise in human trafficking are all examples of the negative effects globalization has brought to the world. The chapter also mentions the income inequality gap growing among the world as a result. I would argue that this is really a result of capitalism, and that globalization is merely the medium with which this is being spread.

However, I think that a lot of the arguments against globalization, while well-intentioned, are not entirely convincing.

I think that many of them rely on seeing the world as a zero-sum game. The idea that the success of India or China hurts the U.S., might be true in terms of short-term economics, but I think long-term it is a positive.

I think that the economic crisis is a perfect example of the need for globalization. It represents a perfect example of a non-zero-sum game. It is a game in which either we all loose or we all win. These are the kinds of games on which I think the success of the whole world essentially rests. In order to play these games successfully, it is very helpful to have countries which are integrated in a network which allows them to work together in overcoming hurdles rather than each simply attacking the challenges without coordination.

For this reason, I think that while there are certainly negatives to globalization, in the end, it will turn out to be a tool which is invaluable in solving the problems not only of today, but of tomorrow.

Fundamentally Wrong

When confronted with a conflict between understanding, acceptance, freedom, and other positive values and conformity to doctrine, which do you side with? If you said the later, then I think you possess what seems to me to be the dominant view within fundamentalism.

This choice to place religious traditions and practices above values which provide for a more just, verdant and equitable world is to me the real harm that fundamentalism brings to the table. It seems a little ironic, because so often much of the religious text expounds these very virtues, and yet, they are often ignored and in place persecution and intolerance are substituted. An example is homosexuality and fundamentalist Christians. I don't remember reading anywhere in the bible about Jesus speaking out against homosexuality. In fact, there is a Christian sect called the Red Letter Christians, who focus only on the actual words of Jesus, and they have a pamphlet. On the cover, the pamphlet reads: what Jesus had to say about homosexuality. And the inside...totally blank.

What Jesus did speak out about was protecting the weak and disenfranchised. And yet, so often these fundamentalist Christians are out fighting against the very rights of this group of people who are often persecuted by the majority, just as Christians were in the early days of their religion.

A quote I like is that the danger is not in "not knowing" but it is in "thinking you know, when in fact, you do not". What is really dangerous to me about fundamentalism is the conviction that the believer has the ultimate Truth with a capital T. More than this, it is the belief that this truth is morally right. Now you take this, and you bring it into a field like politics or science. It is one thing to disagree with someone's political stance or someone's scientific conclusions, but if you truth is morally right, then by definition they are immoral. Now, that is a difficult chasm to cross. No amount of factual objections will change the fact that in your mind the other person is still on the side of immorality.

I want to clarify that fundamentalism isn't rooted only in Christianity or Islam, it is found in virtually every major religion. It is only that the deep political divisions within the U.S. and the War on Terror have brought these two religions to the forefront.

I am glad that in many of our universities we still teach critical thinking skills. I hope that critical, analytical thinking skills will allow people to sincerely gaze upon views that they may have previously taken for granted and ask about not only their truthfulness but also their utility to a positive functional society. David Hume famously said regarding religion: "A wise man...proportions his belief to the evidence".

I ask that we take a long hard look at the evidence and ask ourselves: Do the benefits of fundamentalism outweigh the negatives?

Communism with two N's?

In the USA we pride ourselves on our Democratic history. Not only have we adopted for ourselves a system of Capitalism which underpins this democracy, but we have faught to make sure that other countries also embrace this capitalism, lest they *gasp* think for a second of turning to Communism. After all, under communism, there would be no incentive for anyone to better themselves and work harder. Surely in communism and post-communist countries you would see a population which falls so far behind our own in departments such as literacy so as to make our own argument for us. Or do they?

Below is the statistics of the U.S.'s literacy rates:






Clearly a 99% literacy rate is very good, but it is certainly interesting to note that in terms of spending on education we rank way down at #57.

Now lets take a look at Russia, one of the first countries that comes to mind when one thinks of communism:




Russia actually has a literacy rate higher than our own! Surely though, this must be an anomaly, so lets take a look at another communist country: Cuba




Cuba's literacy rate is even higher than Russia's, and if you look at it's spending on education you might see why as it ranks #9 in the world.

What about a country which has had so much difficulty economically (some might say part of which is due to the fault of communism), Vietnam:




Although we can see quite a discrepancy between men and women which suggests that womens' rights to education may not be equal to that of men, we do definitely see the potential of their educational system to get the literacy rate well into the 90% range despite all of Vietnam's economical and social problems.

Even in China, we see high literacy rates (despite the same sort of gender inequality):





And just in case there is any dispute over whether or not this data is biased in any way, you should know that it came from our very own CIA's word factbook. So this should definitely serve as a lesson that if you decide to decry communism, you should know that there is a high probability that those living in the very countries you criticize will be able to read exactly what you have to say.

WW Chapter 23: Independence and Development in the Global South

"During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought white domination, and i have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunity. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if need be, It is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."
-Nelson Mandela

It is one thing to speak like this from the safety of a newsroom or in front of a crowd at a town hall, but to speak with this conviction at a trial for which you are being accused of a number of crimes which could lead to a lifetime of incarceration is nothing short of amazing. Even more amazing is that Mandela was able to endure 27 years in prison without succumbing to anger or resentment, or becoming disillusioned. Far from it, I remember when he was released, and he spoke these same words.Obviously his conviction remains unshaken.

In a similar way, Gandhi did an incredible job leading India to it's independence through his own unshakable conviction. India had claimed it's independence much earlier than Africa and I feel owe a lot of their success to leaders such as Gandhi, as well as the Congress Party. However, much like Africa, the transition was not smooth. Unfortunately the ongoing conflict between India and Pakistan has been horrible, and now that they both have nuclear arsenals, there is always fear of what would happen should conflict flare up again. In other ways though, India has been incredibly successful. Their economy is doing incredibly well (even as much of their population is poor), and they have managed to create working democracy in a country so diverse that there exist 23 official languages.

Unfortunately, the struggle in Africa was met with some problems not faced by Gandhi. Although the tactics used were very similar the fact that major political parties were made illegal made non-violent solutions much more difficult. A number of other factors were explained in the chapter such as the strength of India's Congress Party,the gradual transfer of power from Britain, and the largest proliferation of technical skills among many Indians, all of which were not so in Africa. These I am sure have contributed to the fact that Africa, unlike India, is not in a very good state of affairs right now.

I also remember Rwanda in the 90's, and unlike the Berlin wall coming down, images of it were rarely on the TV, but nonetheless, it was a conflict that most people had heard of and amounted to genocide. I think the combination of these images bring to mind the idea that while we should strive to encourage people to break from oppression and establish for themselves systems of government that work for the people, we must also be aware of the challenges this transition may bring about and provide the support necessary for a transition to be one that creates a thriving country like India and avoids many of the pitfalls seen in Africa.

WW Chapter 22: The Rise and Fall of Communism

I remember watching the wall between East and West Germany be torn down on TV. The collapse of the Berlin wall symbolized so much in terms of reuniting Germany and also in terms of the fall of communism. What I hadn't learned very much about was the history of how communism spread, and how it declined in so many countries.

I found the story of Russia to be very interesting. I remember growing up calling it the USSR, and after reading this chapter I feel that I know more about how it became to be such a large collection of different nations all under one flag, and also how it failed. A major red flag (no pun intended) in it's development is that communism was forced upon so many of the countries. To be honest, reading about how bad of an idea that ended up being has me a little more worried about the idea of pushing democracy on a country like Iraq and expecting it to stick. It was also amazing to me that the revolution in Russia happened so quickly. I imagine there were a number of components that all allowed it to be so rapid, but still it is pretty amazing considering the size and history of the country.


In terms of China, it seems like as a country it has changed so much from the original vision which the communist party had for it. They have gone from Mao combating capitalist tendencies within the Communist Party itself, to the kind of "free market socialism" that seems to be the driving force of China's now-booming economy. I do have to say, though, that China has really been able to make this hybrid system work far better than I or anyone who was talking about China 10 years ago seems to have predicted.

I was glad that they included a small analysis at the end of the chapter which examined the good and bad inherent in socialism. I think that especially in the U.S. it is used almost as a derogatory term, when in fact most of the developed nations have socialist policies in place in their countries. In fact, if you look at the top places to live in terms of quality of life (http://www.internationalliving.com/Internal-Components/Further-Resources/quality-of-life-2010) you will notice that many of the countries at the top of the list tend to favor more socialistic approaches to problems. So even as we examine the shortfalls of the communist regimes that have existed in history, lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater and ignore the benefits that can be reaped by integrating aspects of socialism into our own lives.

WW Chapter 21: Doomed to repeat it?

I enjoyed the examination that chapter 21 starts of with, which examines
the methodology used in defining the 20th century as a new period of
world history. It admits that the actual chronological length of it is
very brief compared to the periods which precede it. I agree that
eventually we might end up grouping it with the years that follow,
however it seems that so much has transpired that has largely impacted the
world in which we live that it is truly deserving of the title "A New
Period in World History". Chapter 21 begins to try and justify this title
with it's exploration into the collapse and recovery of Europe.

I feel like I know a pretty decent amount about the major conflicts that
defined Europe in the last century, but as I read this chapter I notice a
number of other events which I had never even heard of before. An example
is the Franco-Prussian War, which really helped set the stage for the two
world wars that followed in terms of defining relations between Germany
and France. I also found it interesting and ironic that the great
alliances of the early twentieth century which were created in order to
build lasting peace ended up obligating nations to become involved in
World War I.

Also interesting within this chapter is the mention of an element that
seems to have been resent and played a role in the wars of the later 20th
century: nationalism. Slavic and Austrian nationalism helped begin World
War I and German nationalism played a large role in World War II. I would
go further and suggest that American nationalism has palyed a large role
in our conflicts with both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Lastly I enjoyed reading about the Great Depression. Reading about it is
pretty much like reading about our recent Wall Street collapse. It is
frustrating because it really is the same conequences resulting from the
same policies. We gave the banks and investors free-regin without
oversight thinking the free market would regulate itself. It didn't and
the effects spread beyond simply those who made bad market decisions. The
president then tried to enact sweeping reform and invest in social
pograms in an attempt to boost the economy and his proposals are largely
criticsed by the right as being "socialist". Also much of the regulations
put into place after this disaster that were meant to prevent a repeate
of it (such as the Glass-Stegall Act) were gutted prior to this most
recent economic recession.

What was that quote about those who don't learn from history?

Hawaiian Queen Letter

The following are quotes and my comments from the Hawaii's Last Queen on American Annexation Letter:

"It had not entered into our hearts to believe that these friends and allies from the United States, even with all their foreign affinities, would ever go so far as to absolutely overthrow our form of government, seize our nation by the throat, and pass it over to an alien power"

I like how the queen uses this quote to, on the one hand express the positive relationship between the US and Hawaii through the use of the word "heart", while on the other hand using language to describes the US's proposed actions against Hawaii in such starkly negative terms. This contrasts these two poles of action, making it appear clear to the reader how wrong the latter role is.
---------

"Perhaps there is a kind of right, depending upon the precedents of all ages, and known as the "right of conquest", under which robbers and marauders may establish themselves in possession of whatsoever they are strong enough to ravish from their fellow followers."

I like how the queen here refers to the "right of conquest". SHe has a great way of phrasing many statements throughout her letter in the form of questions.. This makes them seem more open to differing opinion and thus less directly confrontational, while still driving home a strong point. Here she "asks" if there is such a right that gives those with power the abillity to take from others-suggesting that if there is then the US is acting within that right. What is pre-supposed, then, is that if this right does not exist the US is out of line.

--------

"And is the prospect satisfactory to a people who rely on self-government for their liberties?"..."Is such a departure from its established principles patriotic or politic?"

In these two quotes, the queen makes a very clear appeal to the US's own history of its fight for independence from England and the supposed values that it holds dear. This is a great strategy, because many of the principles in the US's constitution are not in line with it's proposed actions against Hawaii. Therefore, it is difficult for a reader to not see the apparent hypocrisy between these two.

--------

"As they deal with me and my people, kindly, generously, and justly, so may the Great Ruler of all nations deal with the grand and glorious nation of the United States of America"

I like the Queen's continual appeal to religion (Christianity) throughout the letter. SHe is essentially appealing to a power "higher" than that of the US in mediating this conflict. This not only resonates in the hearts of the deeply religious US at the timme, but also again highlights the desparity between what Americans say they believe in because of their religion, and their actions which the Queen suggests mmight not be living up to those values.

WW Chapter 20: Power, Wealth, and Inequallity

I liked the first personal story with which the author starts chapter 20. I have always felt that often a simple anecdote can speak volumes, and in this case I believe it did. The author showed, through this simple story about how the English who remained in Kenya refused to use English when speaking to the native people of Kenya exposed the large divide that still separated the people who had superficially declared their relationship to have changed.

I also liked the picture found on page 596 which portrays England as a giant octopus with it's hands in a number of different countries. A negative consequence of the industrial revolution was the power disparity it created between the heavily industrialized nations and those that were not. It allowed these more "advanced" nations to exert their milliard superiority over these other nations, exploiting their people and controlling their resources.

In order to maintain this massive inequality which was in their favor, Europeans often seemed to instigate political positions which seem to be intended to prevent any kind of "power grab" by these exploited people. This includes things like limiting the education which colonial subjects received and excluding them from most jobs which came with money and/or power.


In some ways, you can see systems like this in place even today. The groups in our society who tend to be more powerless or disenfranchised often receive the kinds of education and then jobs which do not afford them the ability to rise in the ranks. At the same time, people with money are afforded more avenues to increase their wealth and power and maintain their elevated social status. An example is the fact that in the USA capital gains are only taxed at 15% while income tax is much higher. Honestly, how many people who are below middle-class have stock portfolios which net any kind of real money that they would pay capital gains tax on? Instead this favorable tax status which capital gains has really only serves to make it easier for richer people to make even more money off of their money. So while it is easy to read chapter 20 and think of many of the actions of those in power against the oppressed as horrible things that used to happen, it is much more accurate to think of them as past permutations of the type of actions which continue even today.

Internal Troubles, External Threats +

It is hard to believe that given China's current economic superiority in the world, that it has had a very tumultuous relationship with a variety of countries. In a way, it is like just about every hollywood movie:

The movie opens with China as a young kid playing around with the other countries. Europe is the biggest and soon starts to pick on the other countries, taking their lunch money and beating them up when they resist. Soon the other victimized countries start to pick on any country smaller than them, and China is near the bottom of this hierarchy. Two opium wars, internal rebellions, and a dependent economy later, and China is in pretty bad shape. This is where the music winds up and we get a montage of China starting to rebuild itself. The movie ends with China as a huge superpower in the world, while most of the other countries are suffering from large economic depressions. But is this really a happy ending?

As I read about the problems that China faced, I see many of them still in their current country. The textbook talked about massive wealth disparity between the ruling elite and the huge numbers of farmers living in poverty. Even today, wealthy as China is, the majority of it's people are still living in that abject poverty. The textbook talked about the rebellions of the masses against ineffective and oppressive governments. While I would definitely not categorize the government as ineffective over-all, it is in certain aspects such as providing a decent standard of living for the masses. In terms of oppressive, I would absolutely say it fits the bill. So I guess while for the country of China, the movie seems to have a happy ending, for the people it might be considered something else. I guess we'll have to wait for the sequel to find out.



--
Reading the plea from the Queen of Hawai'i, I was touched by how eloquently she managed to use many of the Christian concept that the U.S. was touting so highly to serve as arguments against the United States. Her letter is a particularly strong appeal to the United States, as it suggests similar arguments to those that the US made against England, such as dignity and the right to have their own form of government.

You say you want a revolution...: WW Chapter 17

The ideas of revolution were...well... revolutionary in the 18th and 19th centuries, if not in their concept (for the idea of revolt had existed long before then) then in their execution. I have learned about the American revolution at different stages in my education and each time I feel I learn something new. This time, the new tidbit of information came in the form of the idea that America's break from England came not so much in order to establish new freedoms, but instead to preserve the freedoms that they had already been enjoying and which England now threatened to take away. This actually makes a lot of sense, as people are even more likely to value something that they already have in the face of losing it than they are to strive to get something they don't yet have.

I also found it interesting that the French revolution was in part inspired by the American revolution. I know that the ideas of Jean Jacques Rousseau were also important in challenging the concept that man's natural state is one of subjectivity to government. I have read many books by Rousseau, and I see numerous concepts that have found their way into our government. Examples are his idea that the public should revisit the government every so often to ask two questions: Is this form of government working for us? and Are these the people we want running this government? These are questions which we now essentially revisit every election year at the ballot box.

Another interesting development which the book attributes in part to the Atlantic revolutions is the idea of nationalism. Many good things came out of these revolutions, such as a resurgence in the rights of the previously marginalized, and also the beginning of the end of slavery. Nationalism, however, I would argue has actually been a pretty dangerous thing, and I had never before thought that it would have risen out of developments which on the whole I consider positive. After all, I think that there exist numerous examples, especially in the 20th century, of nationalism being a negative thing. Would Hitler have been as successful at rallying Germany to commit such atrocities without the help of a very strong nationalistic fervor in Germany at that time? Likewise, I would argue that many of our military missteps of the last few decades have at least some basis in America's own nationalistic tendencies.

Intro to Chapter 5 and Chapter 18: Industry Cometh

I was surprised at how well the intro to chapter 5 was written. It is not often that I see a piece of writing in a history textbook that strikes me, but that first paragraph did an excellent job of capturing the strange relationship that now exists between the teachings of Confucius (I have read The Analects, and liked it very much) and the full-circle the Chinese government has come regarding their views of them. It also lays the groundwork for the unique relationship that now exists in China between a communist government and a capitalist society. This in turn, is a great segue to chapter 18, which deals primarily with the industrial revolution.

In reading about the industrial revolution, I was very interested in the book's angle regarding why Brittan was the country where it really took-off. It mentions a number of factors that affected various countries' abilities (or lack thereof) to really embrace the industrial revolution. I thought the most interesting, though, was something which is talked about a lot in the politics of America today. It is the idea of the "free market".

Of course, the book doesn't use that language, but as I saw the gist of it's argument for why Brittan was so successful between 1800 and 1900, the themes were pretty clear. "Brittish commercial life encouraged commercialization and economic innovation", "checks on royal authority...provided a freer arena for private enterprise than elsewhere", "Small groups of merchants capitalists might be granted special privileges...European merchants and other innovators from the fifteenth century onward gained an unusual degree of freedom from state control."

In the name of full disclosure, I tend to lean pretty far to the left, and a disagree with many of the pro-business arguments from the right which say that less government is better and that taxes only stifle growth, money trickles down, free market works, etc. This was an interesting read for me, then, because it gave me some insight into the other side. Sure evidence for my arguments are in the book as well (the lower class working conditions grew awful, the exploitation of natural resources grew, etc). But it does raise the question that unless the mechanics of today's society are fundamentally different that those of the 1800's (and thus the situations are not anaologous), should the government of America really back off a little and let the corporations do their thing if we want to remain a leader in terms of technological development?

WW Chapter 16: Evolution of God's Job Description

I like how the chapter begins by drawing a comparison between the intelligent design/evolution controversy that we had a few years back in schools here in the US. It helps to emphasize the fact that controversies surrounding religion that we read about in chapter 16's description of events such as the protestant reformation, are relevant today.

I especially liked reading about the early scientists who challenged religion's view of the world. Reading about Copernicus, Galileo, and Descartes made me think of the famous Nietzsche quote: "God is dead, we killed him". The ideas presented by Copernicus regarding astronomy really challenged the church's infallibility. The bible has sections which clearly suggest that the earth is still and other planets move around it, and for the bible to be wrong when taken in it's literal translation is a concept that was not tolerated at the time. Galileo was the person who made it so difficult to cast reasonable doubt on Copernicus's theory, as his invention of the telescope allowed people to plainly see and diagram the movement of the planets and ultimately determine, through reason, that the earth was not the center of our galaxy, but actually had an orbit and a spin.

This scientific revolution was, in my opinion, ultimately more important that the protestant reformation or other such challenges to the church, because it's arguments were not against the bible or for another interpretation of it, they had nothing to do with it. They did not even need to address it, only to say that the bible was not necessary to understand the world around you, only your own human faculties of observation and deduction.

I would say that Darwin ultimately dealt the death-blow to the God that had existed up until the scientific revolution. That God had been in charge of everything, however the likes of Galileo, Descartes, and Newton had come and shown that everyday events could be shown to be the result of fundamental scientific principles and not acts of God. So that left God with the sole job of having created everything, including us. Then Darwin comes along and shows that God didn't play a role in that either, and that we evolved (as did every other living thing) also along a set of scientific principles.

From then on, God has had a harder time staying relevant in the world. Today his job description for many people is limited to mostly the spiritual side of human existence and what happens to us after we die. I guess the job market is just tough for everybody right now.

Chapter 15: Commerce Goes Global

The centuries from 1450 to 1750 saw a tremendous boom in the globalization of numerous trade endeavors between many countries. Far from being a golden era of achievement, however, it became a time when more developed nations used their might to exploit those they encountered who were not as strong. The Portuguese and the Spanish strove to obtain vast amounts of riches from the East. The Spanish ended up invading the Philippines in this vain, and it paid off (for the Spanish, not so much for the natives) by proving to be a major destination for all the Silver that Spain had managed to round up from around the world. It was this drive for the acquisition of silver, along with the spice trade that really encouraged this globalization of trade. It was during this time that Chinese goods also began to be traded with increasing frequency, even at one point causing the French to pass legislation to deter it's citizens from using fabric made in China (it is interesting to see that even then, France was big on protecting the rights of it's work-force). However, other peoples did not find their rights protected as they found themselves being treated as a commodity in the developing slave-trade. The Atlantic slave trade in particular, which "took an estimated 11 million people from African societies, shipped them across the Atlantic...[and] deposited them in the Americas, where they lived out their often brief lives as slaves" is truly a dark blemish on the history of the world and of this nation.

Discovering Global Past Ch. 4 and Ways of the World Ch 14

Ways of the World speaks, in chapter 14, of the maritime expansion of Europe (which was a unique phenomenon). By the mid-18th century, the Europeans had extended their empires throughout most of the Americas. It goes on to discuss the many developments which took place there, including the enslavement of the Aztecs and the Incas (as well as the bustling cities which were developed on their land) and the importance of the American foods crops in providing nourishment to the ever-growing population of Europeans. It goes on to discuss another important crop: sugar. It is used for a variety of things from a medicine, to a sweetener, to a preservative. However, this crop came with a dire cost, as the deadly conditions those who were forced to produce it had to endure resulted in a 5-10 percent fatality rate. Other Empire also began to rise around this time, such as the Russian Empire and the Mughal Empire.

Discovering Global Past talks, in chapter 4, about sugar in even more detail. Although cheap now, at the time, sugar was actually extremely expensive and valuable. It also continued to describe the harsh conditions needed to prepare commercial sugar. This led to the necessity of forced labor in order to make it a viable business.To this day, I can think of many jobs which are relegated to those without education or other options that no one else would willfully engage in due to the working conditions. It is interesting how technology has both the promise of eliminating the need for humans to do a lot of menial labor, but at the same time it often comes (as sugar did) with a whole new set of pitfalls for humans.

MLK Day

Anyone who has not watched MLK's I have a Dream speech in it's entirety absolutely should. It is only 15 minutes long and yet is an amazing example of oratory abillity and speechwriting. Here is a link to it on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbUtL_0vAJk
I have to say, that I think my favorite part is when he speaks of a promissory note that America has written to the negro people (the promise of liberty, freedom, and equality) but when they went to cash it, it came back insufficient funds. It is such a visceral image that resonates with pretty much everyone, and yet is very clever and poignant in it's critique of America's unequal treatment of minorities.



I also re-read his Letter from Birmingham Jail, which is (in my opinion) the perfect combination of rhetoric and logic. It is amazing that he was able to craft such an impressive piece of writing on scraps of paper in a jail cell. It can be found here: http://abacus.bates.edu/admin/offices/dos/mlk/letter.html

In writing to ministers, he was careful to use biblical examples to both refute arguments against him leveled by the ministers, and also to show them that he, too, has a strong religious education. My favorite quote has to be: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

Other pieces I particularly liked were:

"Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, we must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood."

"Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will."
-a great statement against those whites who said that they agreed with MLK in principle, but not in action.

Lastly, I liked his reference to "days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. "

San Jose Mercury News Article re: Modern Day Sex Slavery

My thoughts on the article:

It is very depressing to think that the sex trade is still so prevalent in many parts of the world such as Vietnam. I would have to say though, that the sex trade is really no more shocking that the mere description of the day-to-day living conditions of many in Vietnam:


"Though Vietnam boasts a literacy rate of about 90 percent, many of the residents in this community have little or no education. They spend their days and nights picking through heaps of garbage for recyclable materials, such as plastic and metal. Children, barefoot and barely clothed, play amid the foul-smelling waste....On a recent morning, 23-year-old Kim Thi Mau sorted dirty plastic bags. Last year, her 4-year-old son Lam drowned when he fell in a ditch filled with water while she and her husband worked nearby. She has two other sons, 20 months and 4 months old."

These conditions not only create an environment in which sex trafficking is more likely to occur (do to the desperation of the people and the lack of resources to fight it), but it also serves to make it not even stand out from the backdrop of suffering that comes to be considered normal.

And so it begins...

My history blog.