Defending Against Nationalism

Jason Kaminsky

Persuasive Writing: First Draft (10/31/08)

     My grandfather, a 75-year-old Jewish retiree and former republican, followed the migratory pattern of many fellow seniors to the Sunshine State 4 years ago. He is now afforded the luxury of complaining about any temperature lower than 60 degrees. Having converted himself several years prior into a staunch democrat and supporter of anything “Clinton,” my grandfather will freely share his political views with anyone, whether or not they are asking. His account of our political state in this nation is similar to many older Americans who seem to share a uniquely stoic image of what America used to be; a place of hope and great leadership, where people shared pride in their communities and their nation. His depiction of what our country has evolved into today is drastically different.  The vision of young, eager boys pulling fire-engine-red Radio Flyer wagons around Philadelphia, collecting any metal they could get their hands on, even if it meant hopping fences to steal rakes at the risk of being chased by blood thirsty hounds, contrasts his view of young people today as the half-hearted inheritors of our nation’s future. The idea that young people today are somehow less patriotic than their elders is not an uncommon opinion. People were voicing a similar characterization of the newly liberated “flower children” who while dropping cubes of acid were protesting the government’s involvement in Vietnam.

     The expression, “I love you, but right now I can’t stand you,” is a sentiment that my mother shared with me during some rather rebellious teenage years. It is also a feeling that many people in our nation might be sharing right now about the government. Looking at what George W. Bush has done with our tax dollars in Iraq while neglecting arguably more important affairs within our own borders, it is hard to be any more sympathetic towards our leaders. “Love for or devotion to one’s country,” is how Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines “patriotism.” Here, it seems, that we are offered a choice. Although some may argue that this statement alone is grounds for heresy, a truly “Un-American” thought, the reality is that one can feel love for something and yet detest the way it which it conducts itself. The reality of what is happening today is that divisive political ideologies have created a fragmented nation where people are believed to be either for or against this country. The bottom line is that Americans should begin questioning their sense of loyalty (devotion) to this nation so that self-proclaimed patriots do not have the power to divide us socially or ostracize us globally. First, we need to take a closer look at how we as a nation have conducting ourselves in recent history. We will need to further define the use of the word patriotism, and then examine the affects of political propaganda for stirring patriotic sentiment. In doing this maybe we can see how our perception of America has become so generationally inconsistent. In addition, if we are able to acknowledge, on some level, that the misuse of our military power has had a significant economic and global backlash, then an argument can be made about the negative aspects of our unconditional political support. Finally, it will be important to note some of the shifts in our national identity that have occurred, in part, due to a rise in conservative values. Recognizing these trends will be important to understanding how fear has persisted in strengthening patriotic “bullying.”

     Saying that today’s youth are “less patriotic” than previous generations, is like shooting an arrow at a moving bull’s-eye. To start, the problem here is that there is no factual evidence to suggest that an actual grading scale can be applied to an individual’s patriotic tendencies. The biggest problem is the difficulty in defining what we mean when we say patriotism. What do we mean when we say that? We have found that our original definition shows that there are at least two ways we can define the actual term patriotism. Professor Walter Berns of Georgetown University adds another layer to the definition in asking, “Who was the patriot in 1861?” (Scott pg1). In his comparison of Robert E. Lee’s refusal to command the Union forces with Grant’s acceptance of the same job, patriotism is being characterized quite differently. It was Lee’s position that he could not raise a hand to his family who were fighting in the Confederate Army, while Grant accepted out his commitment to the political position of this country. It would be difficult to apply either one of these two definitions to the argument over whether or not young people today are truly less patriotic. Susan Macerich, vice-president of a company running over 50 shopping malls in the United States had an even different vision of Patriotism when her company launched a “Gloryous Celebration” in 2000 to “tap into that patriotic sense of America in order to bring back to the Baby Boomer the feeling of being a Boy Scout {or Girl Scout} at an ice cream social” (Fetto pg.49). Patriotism is a more complex and complicated ideology to identify when it becomes more evident that it is based mostly in a person’s own point of view.

     A new generation of Americans, touting vanilla lattes in recycled coffee cups, which proudly feature “Rock the Vote” advertisements, are often viewed as less invested in our future. Is this really true though?  An image has been developed here about a “pampered youth,” never called upon by draft, whose “biggest worry (is) how much money they (will) make on their first job,” (Morgan pg.1). Women who gathered in sewing circles, knitting blankets for our brave troops, are been heralded today for their political activism, while today’s youth are at times depicted as total ingrates, unable and unwilling to rouse themselves to lift even a finger to defend our democracy. Although the strong nationalist response by our people during World War II cannot be viewed any way other than altruistic, the political drive in creating public enthusiasm for war efforts, by the government, has not always been so pure. Almost any American is familiar with the World War I poster featuring Uncle Sam pointing to the viewer and insisting, “We need you!” The fear mongering of McCarthy’s “Red Scare” which employed ads saying things like “Someone talked” or “Is this tomorrow? America under Communism,” are perfect examples of a history of political propaganda. Creating a sensation of panic is nothing new to young people today who have seen their government use Terrorism and “with us or against us” politics to rally support for foreign affairs and spending. What may be different for us today is that young people seem to be exhibiting a greater ability to see through these various misuses of power.

     Abraham Lincoln has been quoted as saying that, “Freedom is the last best hope on Earth.” This statement is somewhat more complicated for a country that seeks absolution from a history of African slavery and the near elimination of Native Americans.  However, Freedom is still our brand here in America. It is our selling point to the rest of the world. We see ourselves as more progressive, more compassionate, and more powerful than any other nation on the globe. Our monument of liberty is poised as the last bastion of hope for a world full of sin and injustice. The issue is, not everyone on Earth agrees with these proclamations.

     A.G. Hopkins, a notable historian of Imperialism, explores a theme in American politics that has not changed much since the time of president Woodrow Wilson, and our involvement in World War I. “The world must be made safe for democracy,” Wilson once said. Hopkins mentions this type of watchdog mentality regarding China’s recent rise to economic power as well as our perception of modern day terrorism. “We are now being warned of The Next Attack… If there is no rest for the wicked, the just must be permanently alert.” (pg 96). Our new concern though, seems to come not from a rising super power or looming threat from the Middle East, but from our country’s thinning economic prowess. “Imperial Overstretch,” is how Hopkins refers to our newest predicament in America. He suggests that we may lack the “stamina” to carry this “imperial burden.” (pg 96). Disregarding for just a moment that the Iraq war was developed out of a monstrous lie to the American people about the possibility of nuclear attack, the idea that we must harbor the burden to make all things right in this world may not be based in a plausible reality. It is possible that our visions of limitless freedom actually do have limits, and those limits may unfortunately be more economically based than we ever thought before. 

*** This paper is unfinished...

Equal Access to Higher Education

Ashley Cirillo
Persuasive Writing sec002
October 30, 2008
Final Paper First Draft


As American citizens, we should have equal access to higher education that is affordable. According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, higher education is defined as any education beyond the secondary level of high school education, particularly when provided through a university or college. It is said that the more educated a person is, the happier they are. This is most likely due to an increase in their standards of living through better job opportunities from the education received. With a declining economy, increasing tuition, and tempting credit cards, it is hard for students not to fall deep into debt. These days, students are graduating college with not only a degree, but also substantial amount of debt. With a declining economy, increasing tuition, and tempting credit cards, it is hard for students not to fall deep into debt. Higher education is almost a requirement to living at least comfortably in today’s society. Now, not even an associates or bachelors degree is enough; one must obtain a masters or doctorates degree for certain careers in order to be successful. However, tuition prices and fees are rapidly increasing. Many people cannot afford college, and many students are forced to take out high interest loans to pay for school. So why is tuition continually rising and where is all that money going?
Tuition is rising for several reasons. “Funding Roller Coaster for Higher Education” written by Michael S. McPherson and Morton Owen Schapiro explains that because of changes in the economy, public universities and colleges have had rough financial times; the way they make up for this lack of support from the government is by raising tuition. McPherson and Schapiro argue that public colleges and state-government budgets need to be sheltered from the “business-cycle” by changing tax systems, developing programs that would help education budgets in economic downtimes, or influence public universities to save some funds during good economic times to have for what the future may bring. McPherson and Schapiro believe state governments need to view higher education as a priority and spend budgets accordingly.
On the other hand, Lynne Munson argues in “College Tuitions Rise While Endowments Simply Swell” how although colleges and universities are “the nation’s wealthiest institutions” and their endowments only keep increasing. Munson exclaims that universities and colleges are not helping students attend school with this extra money they have in their endowments. For a better understanding of just how much college tuitions have gone up on average she explains that today gas would cost $9.15 a gallon and a gallon of milk would cost $15 if those prices had increased at the same rate as college tuition has since 1980. Munson states that the Senate Finance Committee was discussing making colleges less costly by tapping higher education endowments. She mentions that endowment spending could save students a lot of money, and notes: “The Congressional Research Service found that a mere 0.7% payout could halt tuition increases at the 20 schools with the largest endowments.”
As tuition is rising, the students are forced to take out loans not only to pay for school, but also for tuition fees, books, housing, food, and social activities. If they run out of loan money, some students are forced to put the balances on high-interest credit cards. Additionally, Ron Lieber explains in “Counseling Students on Loans,” that students who do not borrow enough money often work long hours to make up for the difference. However, that can sometimes result in being too stressful for a student, so they drop out and are left without an education and in debt.
With this in mind, students need to be aware of just how much college will actually cost after factoring in the extras besides tuition. Parents and students should become aware of how to properly take out loans in order to prevent unnecessary debt. Lieber tells us in the late 1980’s the government started to require counseling from universities to students who were taking out loans for the first time. Lieber argues that these counseling sessions should be more intense to really make students grasp how to be responsible with loans. He states that parents should get involved so they also understand the process. He advises students to check their debt often so that they are aware of how much they owe. Lieber tells students to get to know someone in the financial aid office—someone who can answer all your questions. He states that a student should not take out too large of a loan, but just enough. Finally, Lieber advises students to be careful with private loans because of high, unfixed interest rates.
Affordable tuition is something that not many people are opposed to, unless you are on the money-making side of the business. However, there are a few down falls to lowering college tuitions. If tuition costs were cut down, it would result in an obvious assumption of lower quality of education. This means there might be less faculty, larger class sizes, and a decreased amount of offered courses. Moreover, the amount of time it takes to earn a degree might increase. Nevertheless, if these rebuttals are seemly true, at least everyone would have the opportunity to receive higher education. Even though the class size may be larger or it takes more time to complete a degree, at least it is better than not being able to afford an education at all. Smaller classes do create a better learning environment, but if people feel the need to be in smaller classes, maybe a private university would better suite their needs.
If tuition continues to rise, there will only be two options: only the rich will be able to afford higher education or come out of school only to be buried with debt. The average citizen deserves to have access to an affordable education; however, rising tuition is keeping this from being true. A shriveling economy along with greedy colleges with large endowments is keeping students from getting the funds they need to afford school. In addition, high-interest loans are leaving students with a hefty amount of debt. It is important that students are aware of all the underlying costs of college, as well as understanding how to accurately use student loans. Higher education can lead to a successful career and fulfilling life, which should not be a dream or even a privilege that is held hostage because of financial situations, but rather a right to which every American citizen is worthy of.


Works Cited

Lieber, Ron. "Counseling Students On Loans." New York Times, The (NY) September 6, 2008, Late Edition - Final, Business/Financial Desk: 1. NewsBank Access World News. Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. 25 Sept. 2008. http://infoweb.newsbank.com/.

McPherson, Michael S., and Morton Owen Schapiro. "Funding Roller Coaster for Public Higher Education." Science 302.5648 (14 Nov. 2003): 1157-1157. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. 25 Sept. 2008. https://libproxy.temple.edu:2343/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=11546986&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. 2008. Accessed 26 October 2008. <www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary>.

Munson, Lynne. "College tuitions rise while endowments simply swell." USA Today (n.d.). Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Temple University, Phildelphia, PA. 22 Oct. 2008. https://libproxy.temple.edu:2343/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=J0E342114616907&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Media Influences Society

Christie Porter
Diane Varner
Persuasive Writing
29 October 2008

Media Influenced Society

It is known that in the world we live in today, many of the choices we make come from the basis of things we learn from the media. My question is why do we allow the media to make our choices for us? Dictionary.com describes media as, “the means of communication, as radio and television, newspapers, and magazines, that reach or influence people widely.” To decide what styles are in, we flip the pages of Vogue magazine. To decide what presidential candidate we vote for, we listen to the television and read the newspaper. To decide majority of the choices we make, we turn to the media. The media is the basis of the information that we as a society consume. Everyday, millions of people use the media to help make decisions because it is and will always be the fastest source of any new information, which means that consumers will always turn their direction to discover any new material.
In an article published by EPM Communications, titled “Women read ad inserts, catalogs; men go online,” the author describes how effective each type of media influences different categories within each gender. In a study done which showed the different percentages for how media influences buying decisions, it showed that women are more persuaded by ad inserts and physical printed ads, whereas men are more interested in commercials, radio ads, and internet advertisements. The author writes, “Women age 35-54 are most likely to say they use ad inserts and circulars to help them decide where to shop for a variety of goods, including home electronics, home furnishings, and home improvement items” (EPM Communications). This alone shows how advertisements are proven to influence the places and things that people purchase.
In an article written in the Herald Sun (Australia) titled “Media”, the author writes about how his students worked out the theories of why we as a society are easily influenced by the media. He states that, “Students were able to discuss how some audiences may be more susceptible to influence than others. But there is more to it than that. If the media does have the power to influence us, then there may be implications for society” (Hourigan). He continues on to explain the influence and writes, “If that potential influence is negative, society may wish to impose ways of regulating that influence to perhaps minimize harm, or society may have the expectation that people working in the media must demonstrate some responsibility or control themselves” (Hourigan). He writes about variations of ways audiences are influenced and then focuses in on an example of The Dark Knight. He states how the producers were aware of the expectations from the audience and advertised very strongly to influence those specific expectations. This article is important in understanding that the media can take the publics interest in something, and make it even more desirable which influences us to do what they want the consumers to do.
One of the prime examples of the influence that media has on our society is within the fashion industry. On average, Americans purchases items that are said to be “in style.” How do we know that they are what’s hot that season, because the media tells us what to and what not to wear. In an article written in The Australian titled “Fashion measures up in the mainstream,” the author covers the idea that fashion in the media has skyrocketed in the past few years. She writes, “Project Runway, Australia's Next Top Model, Supermodel, Today Tonight, A Current Affair, Today, Sunrise, Mornings with Kerri-Anne, The Morning Show and even talkback radio, they're all covering a subject that used to be nothing but a 30-second filler that tail-ended our news broadcasts. Yep, fashion is news” (Hoyer). She pries on the idea that there are so many shows which are based on the idea of fashion, which makes the industry that much more accessible to society. Hoyer writes, “The mainstream media and magazines beyond the established fashion titles like Vogue, marie claire and Harper's Bazaar are talking about clothes. It's scrutinizing the girls and boys who model them, the celebrities who endorse them and gossiping about the lives of designers who put them on the racks.” She states how the editors of these fashion magazines, and the managers are large fashion industry stores have commented that the extra publicity in the media coverage has increased the publics interest in fashion, which in turn has added a great amount of business for them. Hoyer quotes the editor of fashion magazine Grazia Alison Veness McGourty and writes, ‘“Fashion isn't just about hemlines and polite fashion. It's about Orlando Bloom, who is dating Miranda Kerr, it's about the crossover of musicians and celebrities who are wearing certain designers and it is more fascinating than it ever was. So of course there the media interest is warranted”’ (Hoyer). This article is important in understanding why fashion has become such a dominant part of our media today. We can see that because there are more fashion based things coming into our homes such as television shows and magazines, we as a society turn to these media sources as a guide in the direction of what is considered fashionably acceptable.
Through the articles read, an understanding can be gained of why exactly we turn to the media. In reality, they are the first to know exactly what is going on in our society. It is almost as if we need to turn to these sources as a guide to keep our economy and culture running accordingly. Its true that at times the media can persuade the public to think and act a particular way, however there is only so far they can go to change an individuals beliefs. The media is important because it gives us an idea of what is going on in our world today, what to expect, and ways in which to go about our everyday lives.

Steve Smart Persuasive Writing

Media is often the scapegoat for any and all problems that happen within society. A current trend is blaming video games and music for anything related to violence, sex, or other “ills of society” The connection drawn is unfair because the true connection is the media replicating what society is, and what it likes. The truth is media holds no accountability or anyone’s actions, the accountability should always fall 100% on the party committing the action.

One of the first questions I tackled was: “Does any correlation with playing videogames and violence exist” I found an article apart of a running psychologist journal on aggressive behavior. A study was conducted with college students playing first person shooters. The observers then recorded feelings of hostility, frustration and aggression. The results showed that most had slight increases the longer they played the game. This in my opinion is a part of the experience, no different from feelings of shock or anxiety from a suspenseful movie. A change in emotion is reasonable but we are not slaves to our emotions and so media can get a reaction out of you but it can not produce or be held responsible for an action.

Music does not deserve the bad rep or blame it gets nowadays, more specifically Hip Hop. I searched to prove this and found two news articles with opposing ideas on the matter. The first included 2 deaths of individuals who imitated a rapper who decided to dance on top of their car while it moves slowly in the first gear. This example seems like the most obvious one that people hold no responsibility for themselves. Common sense no longer exists, coffee has to be marked as “hot may cause burns” because some people don’t understand the concept of hot coffee and it’s ridiculous. The article explains the new trend started by a few individuals in the bay area of California. A handful of idiots who make music should not be representation of Hip Hop. Eminem speaks about the blame falling onto music on several occasions. He questions why is everyone turning around looking for the cause of it and satisfied when they can point the finger at the media. A lyric in one song titled “who knew” expresses these sentiments “but don’t blame me when little eric jumps off the terrace, you should’ve been watching him apparently you aint parents” The point is the parents, and the people have to be more responsible, the musicians are not every child in America’s mom or dad and you shouldn’t expect them to act in that manner.

The second article defended Hip hop and was against blaming it for teen pregnancy, violence, etc. It discussed rock and roll music that originally also had a bad aura by the media for an unwholesome message. John Martin discussed how before the hip hop generation, education of African Americans, pregnancy rates, jobs employed etc were not as good as they are during the current hip hop generation.

The Wikipedia article was an easy experience considering I was putting up true information. It doesn’t however protect against bias. I found an article that opposed my opinion on my choice of the effect media has on people and supplied a source and the article is still up and it’s been 3 days. It also raises awareness that anybody can be writing this considering I’m not a prestige writer and I just tossed in a one liner for a topic that anyone can now view and may consider as a cold hard fact.

Media can be blamed for absolutely anything it seems and it’s perfectly safe and accepted. I think it’s sad a kid dances on a moving car and the first course of action is to point the finger of blame at the music. We no longer hold any responsibility for our actions, there’s always a reason that isn’t us. If people are searching for the true solution to help with today’s problems such as the normalcy of sex, violence, drugs, etc it starts with ending the use of the media as a scapegoat and making our society, and the individuals in it a lot more responsible.

Competitve Sports in Schools. Second Reaction Paper

Here is the revised version of my second reaction paper along with my wikipedia screen shot.

-Aaron

While competitive sports at the elementary and middle school level may have a positive affect on the physical health of our increasingly unfit society, it is important to consider the negative psychological consequences that result from requiring everyone to partake in such activities. By mandating that all students participate in activities such as dodge ball, flag football, soccer, and other highly competitive sports, there is an increased exposure to unfair scrutiny and bullying. For this reason, it would be in the best interest of childhood growth and development to eliminate competitive sports from the curricula of elementary and middle school physical education programs across the United States. According to many physical health, as well as psychological health experts, there are non-competitive physical activities that would allow for everyone to receive the health benefits of a structured gym class without the damaging social implications that competitive sports have on children before they have reached social maturity.
After researching the topic, I found that there are many people who hold the belief that an elementary or middle school is an inappropriate place for a highly competitive structure. Dr. Daniel Frankl, a professor of kinesiology at UCLA stated, “Leading physical education scholars hold the view that the "Competitive Achievement Model" should be kept out of the physical education curriculum, especially at the elementary school level” (Frankl 2003). He further explained that most children do not reach the level of maturity that is required to successfully participate in competitive sports until the age of twelve. Similar to the argument that Dr. Frankl presents, Thomas E. Shaffer, a former Director of Medical Services for the State of Ohio Juvenile Diagnostic Center, stated that, “interscholastic athletics is likely to become a high-pressure, demanding activity that is not suitable for younger children” (Shaffer 1964). The fact that this was written over four decades ago emphasizes that this has been a problem in the minds of scholars and experts for quite some time.
Robert Lipsyte, of The New York Times, illustrates a prominent example of the link between gym class competition and bullying. Lipsyte, in a 2002 article, discusses the psychological damage that the game of dodge ball has on young children. These aspects of the game that Lipsyte discusses remind me of playing dodge ball in fourth grade gym class and being purposely pelted in the face with a ball just to have everyone laugh at me. Lipsyte refers to the game as being wrought with elements of bullying, blame shifting, targeting, and embarrassing others, aspects that I fully recognize and agree with.
All of these sources serve to further emphasize my point that competitive sports should not be included in the curricula of elementary school and middle school physical education classes. While there are many sources that support the points that I make, not all of them are credible. What makes these sources credible is the databases host them. By being hosted on databases such as Academic Search Premier and Lexus Nexus, these sources have been verified by scholars and professionals in the specialized fields. While finding the information for this reaction paper, I came across many websites with seemingly useful information, however they were unreliable. The first “source” that I came across was Wikipedia. My initial reaction to this information was that it was credible. It seemed well written and well composed, but since it is an open source website where anyone is capable of changing or adding information, I knew that basing an argument off of the information on the website would inevitably ruin my argument.
To further experiment with Wikipedia, I edited the page about physical education by adding the text, “Requiring individuals to participate in physical education activities, such as dodgeball, flag football, and other competitive sports remains a controversial subject because of the social implications that these games have on young children.” The fact that I was so easily able to add this information and therefore affect the way other people think about the mandates of competitive sports in gym classes is both scary and empowering. While I feel strongly about the subject, and from my research I know that there are at least a handful of scholars and experts that feel the same way, it was not until I wrote about it on the website that some people may have started to consider the topic. Because of this experience, I am now more hesitant to use Wikipedia even for basic knowledge and definitions. If I can edit the information, obviously anyone can, and there are many self-proclaimed experts that would be detrimental to my understanding and dangerous to my research process had I not been aware of the risks.

Should The Be A Ban On Foie Gras?

Foie gras is a delicacy served in restaurants worldwide. It is also one of the largest controversial dishes served in history as well. Foie gras is the liver of a duck or goose that has been purposely fattened by force feeding the birds. It’s known for it is known for its creamy taste. Since the French delicacy is produced by force feeing the animals, or otherwise known as “gavage”, as one can imagine it is a very controversial topic.

The tradition of gavage most likely originated in Egypt, which then influenced the Greeks to adopt the practice. And finally, in the beginning of the eighteenth century, foie gras spread throughout France where it officially became a delicacy. Generally, the practice of force feeding involves a large metal tube, nine to twelve inches long, attached to a funnel inserted into the birds’ esophagus. Then, corn meal is poured into the funnel, to fatten the birds liver to the desired weight. The food is pumped into the stomach by either a pneumatic or manual pump. Each bird consumes, involuntarily, approximately 300-500 grams of corn meal per day, which is far more than what it would usually consume. This process is repeated a few times within one day for about a month, which is when the bird is then slaughtered for its’ liver for the popular “delicacy” foie gras.
The birds are confined to small pens, where there is not enough room for them to live comfortably, nor is it safe. The force feeding process not only damages their esophagi causes liver damage amongst the birds, but can also create emotional distress amongst the animals. Since they live in such small confinements, they are more likely to harm eachother and perhaps themselves as well.
As one can imagine, foie gras is extremely controversial in every aspect. The force feeding process is considered inhumane and extremely cruel, especially since the birds are forced to consume substantially larger amounts of food than they would normally eat for the sole purpose of a tasty and expensive dish. PETA constantly reminds the public by displaying disturbing images of the birds being treated in such an awful manner, they tend to focus on exhibiting these images and informing the public outside of restaurants and stores that sell foie gras.
The demand for foie gras is quite high, and many restaurants and businesses fear banning it. They feel it might damage their sales dramatically if foie gras were to be banned. However, many feel that state by state, soon the United States will become foie gras free. On the other hand, in 2006, the city of Chicago banned the selling of foie gras in all restaurants and stores. Many chefs were maddened by this decision, and therefore the “duckeasy” era occurred. Chefs in various restaurants rebelled and continued to serve the delicacy regardless of the law in effect. Not until recently, did this law reverse, enabling the restaurants in the city of Chicago to serve foie gras once again.
Since the reversal of this act went into effect, obviously members of PETA or any other organization, which is against animal cruelty is enraged. It makes one wonder to what extent people will go to produce an expensive delicacy pleasing to the taste buds, and how serious people are regarding taking a stand against inhumane treatment of animals. They would rather enjoy a rich pate and look the other way while being informed on how it is produced. In order to have a dish banned worldwide, and actually maintain the ban, people need to become more informed and retaliate to those who either serve or sell these dishes.
Throughout this assignment I chose to use a variety of resources including scholarly journals, trade publications, and an article from a credible newspaper which I came across online. I also reviewed the information Wikipedia had regarding my topic of foie gras, and found it extremely useful. However I noted it might not have all been accurate. I kept the information I found on Wikipedia in the back of my mind while using my other resources and found that for the most part, Wikipedia’s information on foie gras agreed with what the other publications had stated. Therefore, I found that Wikipedia’s website was useful in mostly every aspect, however not a totally credible resource to actually cite in my future research papers. I also found it interesting that what I wrote on Wikipedia’s page on foie gras, which was not true, was taken down almost immediately after I posted it. This shows that Wikipedia supervises everything that people decide to post on their website, and attempt to keep all of their information factual and credible as well. Even though at times, some postings are overlooked.

A question of credibility

Chris Haughery
Reaction 2

There is a great deal of information to be had on any given topic. Some of it’s credible and some isn’t. How do we find this information and how do we decide if it’s credible? Do we as individuals decide, or are there appointed people who decide? Are there accepted forms of information which can give us credible answers to our questions? In this essay I will endeavor to answer these questions and provide a bases for understanding credibility.
I believe there are credible forms of information, which are regulated by qualified individuals who have mastered specific topics. Now that I have stated this, the question is, where do we find this information? I think the best place to start would be by looking at scholarly journals and trade publications. These sources form the foundation of credible information. The people who contribute to these journals and written works are considered credible because of the time and effort they have devoted to understanding the issue written about. This is where I went to find answers I had about urban sprawl.
My understanding of urban sprawl is still limited, so I decided to begin by asking some fundamental questions. The three questions I wanted to answer were first, what is urban sprawl? Second, what are its dangers? And third, what should be done about it? I began my search by looking through credible sources of information until I found desirable answers. According to one source, urban sprawl is defined this way: "Sprawl (n.) is a pattern of land use in an urban area that exhibits low levels of some combination of eight distinct dimensions: density, continuity, concentration, compactness, centrality, nuclearity, diversity and proximity"(Snyder, 2000). I found through another source that the dangers of urban sprawl center around environmental effects, the loss of valuable land, and the decline of the people’s sense of community (Cooper, 2004). I also discovered through research that urban sprawl can be discouraged, by regulating the uncoordinated building of roads. In addition, growth where transportation infrastructures are not adequate, should be prohibited (Maya,2008).
To find answers to the questions I had about urban sprawl, I searched through news articles and scholarly journals. By doing this I found answers, and I feel I can be fairly sure these answers are credible. The authors of this information are the authorities on the subjects. If there’s any accurate information available, it’s going to come from them. I could have searched for answers randomly on the web, and I probably would have found some. These answers can’t really be trusted, though. How do we know who wrote them? It could have been anybody with an opinion. Unfortunately, an opinion will not suffice when I’m trying to find credible information.
The tough part about finding accurate information is the effort you have to put into it. To find relevant information, a degree of effort has to be exerted. There is a lot of knowledge that must be evaluated in order to find exactly what you’re looking for.
In contrast, information on Wikipedia is not difficult to obtain. It’s very easy to search a topic there and find answers, credible answers at that. Yes, I think Wikipedia is a credible source of information, but I also feel this credibility remains undefined. For instance, I anonymously entered false information into the Wikipedia page on urban sprawl, and it stayed there for about a day, then it was taken down. This shows that someone is regulating these pages. Do they research the information posted to the pages? Who decided the information I placed there was wrong, an authority on the subject? If an authority is regulating the content of a Wikipedia page it seems that the information would be credible. With this said, I am still uncertain about Wikipedia, due to the fact that anyone is capable of posting content to most of the pages.
As I stated before, I believe there are credible sources of information. A degree of effort needs to be exerted to find these sources, but they are there. There will always be people who are the authority on any given topic, and their opinion is credible. Most of the time authorities write for journals or trade publications, and thus these sources are the most established forms of credible information.

There ain't no love for Love

Kyle Arcomano

Persuasive Writing

Reaction Paper 2

The first question I asked myself to was, “what exactly happened to Love Park for skateboarders that make it so different than in the past?” In order for me to get a clear understanding of the situation, I began researching news articles, scholarly journals, and using my personal observations. As a skateboarder myself, I knew that Love Park was a mecca for skateboarding since early 1990’s. I saw Love Park all over skateboarding advertisements in magazines and clips were featured in almost every skateboard video at the time. To skateboarders, Love Park is a perfectly designed skate park located right in the middle of a city. It is surrounded by public transportation which made it a very popular and convenient spot for the skateboarding community. Due to all the fame and a hype about Love Park, especially when the X-games were hosted at Love Park and City Hall in 2001, city officials decided to shut down Love Park for skateboarders in 2003.

“The plan involved both a physical restructuring of the park and the strict statutory

enforcement of a 2000 Municipal Code banning skateboarding in and around the

park. To reinforce their plan, City officials instituted an around-the-clock police

officer patrol of the park area to impose the skateboarding prohibition with $300

citations and possible imprisonment.”

The reasoning behind all of this was simply because us skateboarders are deviant, cause damage, and are worthy of removal. Now skateboarding is not permitted on the grounds, but officials still allow homeless crack heads to roam the property and abuse drugs.

My second question was to figure out “who was in charge of the banning of Love Park?” This is when I had to go outside of my personal knowledge and research databases and news articles from the past. For the most part I knew the city was fully supporting banning skateboarding, but it wasn’t until recently that I found out Mayor Nutter proposed the bill to ban skateboarding and renovate the property. This did not only affect the skateboarding culture around the world, but it highly affected 92 year old Edmund Bacon. Bacon was the famous architect of Love Park who was entirely against the renovation. He was so against it that he stated, “I want to ride a skateboard across LOVE Park and get arrested," which he followed through with in November 2002. He successfully made it through Love Park without getting arrested and earned respect from skateboarders around the world. This went to prove that not everyone in the Philadelphia community supported the new bill.

The final question I wanted to get an answer for was “how have people reacted to the new renovation?” Without a doubt, the entire skateboarding community (whether it be skateboarders, photographers, filmers, magazines, or companies), does not approve what the city of Philadelphia has done. For some people, it was part of their daily routine to hangout and enjoy Love Park. For others, it was worth a trip to experience the skateboarding terrain at Love Park. The skateboarding community responded to Mayor Nutter’s plan by a one million dollar donation by DC shoes in 2004. “The money, in increments of $100,000 a year, would pay to repair skateboard damage and subsidize a monitor to ensure that skateboarding takes place at approved times.” The financial aid was never accepted by the city, and as a result the conflict continues to grow between skateboarders and the city of Philadelphia.

B

I enjoyed testing the limits of Wikipedia until I discovered a few days later that my statement was erased off the site. The topic I contributed to is Love Park, which already had a subheading titled “Skateboarding.” I read through everything that was already posted, which to me was all truth and entirely accurate. After the final paragraph, I added a little bit of my own knowledge of skateboarding at Love Park. The statement I posted was all facts about the consequences of skateboarding Love Park and about skateboarders being banned from the property but the homeless crack heads are still there. I believe the information I contributed was credible and flowed nice with the rest of the statements. Apparently Wikipedia has thought other wise and most likely had a scholar edit out my statement maybe because it sounded illegitimate.

Considering my information was deleted from the site, I do believe Wikipedia is getting to be a more reliable source on the internet because of those who edit out miscellaneous information that people contribute. I heard a rumor that a study was conducted that compared Wikipedia to an encyclopedia, showing that Wikipedia is more than 90% accurate. I think Wikipedia is a good source of information to get an overview of a topic, but I don’t always trust the information on the website. After I get an idea of the topic, I then outsource to a more reliable and scholarly website.

Philadelphia's incresing Crime Rate

Kyle Bush

Professor Varner

Adv1103

September 29, 2008

Second Reaction Paper

As the days accumulate, so does the number of killings of individuals in the inner city streets of Philadelphia. While fingers are being pointed as to who is to blame, more lives are being lost. Violence continues to increase within the inner city of Philadelphia. The violence has increased in the area due to the lack of education, strategic programs of combating violence, and the disregard for the well being of poverty stricken people, who live in these areas.

This has been an ongoing issue that clearly needs to be taken care of. Many questions have arisen from this issue. However, I have three questions, if answered, could help this ongoing issue.

· What current programs are in place to stop the crime rate?

· Is the lack of education and or poverty stricken environment attributed to the increasing crime rate?

· If violence had increased this much in suburbia Philadelphia would there be more efforts to stop violence?

I feel as though these three questions can help, they are not the complete answer for solving the issue at hand. Being that I live in the area, I already have my answers to the questions, but after doing some research I found that my answers were close to others. After going through the articles, I found the following answer to my three questions.

Since the crime rate as sky rocketed in the past couple years, programs indeed have been implemented to combat with the increasing crime rate. These programs include Operation Safe Streets, Stop and Frisk, and Mothers United Against Violence. Operation Safe streets place a strong police presence in high risk violent communities and Stop and Frisk allows police to randomly frisk residents, if they seem to be acting suspicious. On the hand, Mothers United Against Violence is a more grassroots driven community program aimed to unite people, who have lost someone, and to stop the violence in Philadelphia. These programs are not the only answer; education needs to be included with.

In areas stricken by poverty, the dropout rate is at 45%. These areas also account for the most violent areas, which goes to show that education is a key to stopping the increasing violence. Education needs more funding in these areas, as more and more kids dropout and look to the streets to find their survival. In other areas of the city of Philadelphia, this survival psyche is not present simply, because there are better resources and opportunities.

In suburban Philadelphia, the education is clearly better. There is definitely a strong police presence everywhere even though crime is subsequently low. In suburbia problems are stopped before they even start, there is no way over 400 people would be killed in a matter of a couple years in this area. The efforts to combat violence in suburbia Philadelphia are better than those in the inner city, even though there is a rarity of crime in that area. It’s apparent that this violence would not take place in suburbia Philadelphia.

In conclusion, to stop these people who are clearly oppressed, there is much to be done. It starts with education, there needs to be more funding to bring people from the streets to the classroom. There needs to be a more equal playing field with suburbia Philadelphia, there needs to be no favoritism when it comes to controlling violence and giving people more resources to succeed.

After finishing my paper and searching through Wikipedia, I realized that my issue wasn’t a part of the erroneous information plastered on Wikipedia. So, I elected to create my own Wiki on my issue. Before entering the information I felt excited because this issue means a lot to me. Since I’m from the area where the issues lie, I feel as though I give a different perspective on the issue. I felt credible entering the information, because it was the truth and have well respected people to back my ideas up. Also, as I have already stated I feel as though I bring a different perspective to the table about the issue, which needs to be heard.

Questioning American Nationalism

Jason Kaminsky_ Persuasive Writing: Reaction Paper #2_ (10/13/08)

   The topic for this paper arose out of a personal desire to understand my wavering inner sense of patriotism. Watching this great nation swallow itself with its own ego, while careening into financial ruin, has depleted some of my faith in our democracy. Should pride in this, or any other, country be showered unconditionally or does it need to be earned?  In a nation where Gallup polls reveal that 69% of the population define themselves as “extremely” proud to be an American ^[1], a person who is on-the-fence may feel somewhat excluded from this national sentiment. Citing various sources, questions will be raised concerning American nationalism and its place in modern society. Examining the validity and soundness of our various source materials will also be discussed.

   What is American nationalism? In the quarterly conservative politics and culture journal, The Public Interest, Writer Michael Barone ^[2] authors an article discussing the strength of American nationalism. He describes nationalist politics as “a basis for governance” that is adaptable for implementation in other national settings _{(p 42)}. His position is that the politics of socialism and liberalism are unsuccessful because they do not have the nationalist’s shared sense of pride, which serves to hold its people together _{(p 51)}. Barone argues, to a conservative audience, that our system is superior and should be viewed as such. 

   For nationalists, shared values are a source of political strength. Believing that a nation’s way of life and system of government are superior to another has become the fundamentals of our empiricism. If we spread democracy abroad, then we are somehow performing a God given duty to the world. The author then suggests that, “We should not be shy about boasting these principles,” _{(p 52)} explaining that those countries around the world which adopt democracy and strong nationalist parties will be less likely to go to war with other democratic nations _{(p 54).} Nationalism, as for as this particular writer is concerned, is a core set of values shared by the people, which drives us to globally implement our highly effective and superior brand of government. The Public Interest’s conservative views and specific target audience should be noted here. The opinions expressed by the writers in this journal will be most likely be providing a biased source of information.

   Does the government use national pride as a tool for political action? In the scholarly Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History ^[3], historian A.G. Hopkins talks about the uncertainty accompanying our nation’s rapid economic growth in the 20^th century. He believes that the affects of globalism on older industries, created a level of national anxiety. This fear concerning our future transformed, “conservative patriotism into assertive nationalism after 9/11” _{(p 95)}.

   To further his point, the author invokes the political theories of Italian sociologist Vilfredo Paret in order to make his claim that the conservative and liberal elite in America are similar to the analogy of the Lion and the Fox.  The conservative lion stands for tradition and will use force to protect it if necessary, while the liberal fox seeks to combine ideas and grow through persuasion _{(p 97)}.

   “Forceful nationalism,” as Hopkins refers to it, is the result of lion’s assertive character and strong nationalist views, which drive its response to world affairs. In response to the 9/11 attacks, the neo-conservatives found their call to action, “resonated with long standing and deeply-held conservative beliefs embodied in the notion of American exceptionalism, which held that the United States was the ultimate custodian of liberty and democracy and had a duty to defend them against assailants at home and abroad” _{(p 105)}. With this idea in mind, we can see how our sense of national duty and pride could be a collective force by which the government can gain support for its foreign policy. The soundness of this argument is stronger than the previous article, because it has less of a conservative bias. It also leans less heavily on the basis of opinion.   

   How have “family values” affected nationalist sentiment? Eric Celeste, writer for the Star-Telegram Newspaper ^[4], talks about the origins of this concept in America, beginning with the “family values” speech given by Dan Quail in 1992, which specifically pointed to impoverished African Americans. The term has grown to also encompass the more modern conservative definition of Middle American, God-fearing, and proud. Celeste cites the very beginnings of American family values with George Washington who told the people, “his public policies would be grounded in the principles of private morality” _{(p 1)}. The author takes jabs at The Missouri Department of Human Services for its encouraging of “traditional family values,” as opposes to those who promote, as he says, non-traditional values like, “sloth or a dislike of football.” Celeste later refers to this value system as propaganda because of its use as a blanket statement with no real definition. The author gives this movement limited credibility for it’s ability to define itself, but does make note of the undeniable significance of people’s reactions when asked about their own family values. Politicians often use personal connections to issues to inspire fear that our individual sense of family will somehow be stripped away from us. Although one might trust in a newspaper article as a definite source of credible information, the reader must consider the author’s more liberal view towards family values.

   Nationalism and pride seem to be essential to a society’s cohesiveness, but it appears that their application seems to be more political than interpersonal. Fear seems to be the root of much of our sensibility as a nation, and appears to be the mechanism used to operate and maneuver the national consciousness. Fear has prevented us from questioning the choices our leaders have been making, but it is our crushing national ego that blinds us to our own weaknesses. If we cannot learn from our mistakes, how can we grow as a nation?

   *My Wikipedia addition was placed in the article about “pride.” Under the heading of United States, I entered a definition for pride as quoted by the United Nations in the year of its formation, 1945. However, the quote was from letter written by Hitler, in regards to how a government should be running a nation. It has now been 5 days since the original post, and it still has not been removed. Who is fact checking this website? How can we be sure that anything found on Wikipedia is true? Is it possible now to rewrite our entire history by chipping away at its truth with these kinds of small and undetected lies? The thought of that is rather frightening.

References

[2] Barone, M. (1993). The triumph of american nationalism. Public Interest, (111), 41-55.

[4] Celeste, E. (1999, Family values are: A. A cheap political slogan designed to get your vote - b. the thing that holds the country together - c. best defined by needs of a particular family - answer: All of the above. Fort Worth Star-Telegram, pp. 1.

[1] Fetto, J. (2000). Patriot games. American Demographics, 22(7), 48-49.

[3] Hopkins, A. G. (2007). Capitalism, nationalism and the new american empire. Journal of Imperial & Commonwealth History, 35(1), 95-117.