#martin luther king short paragraph

[windmilltothestars]

My plan was to return to tumblr VICTORIOUSLY in 2023.  I would finally finish those Les Mis fanfics I was supposed to finish ages ago.  (Being so deeply embarrassed at never finishing them when I was supposed to was a big factor in my sort of disappearing off the internet last year; hiding in shame for broken promises, lost HONOR!)  I would begin writing and drawing daily, improving my skills (I paid money for online art classes!  Learning shading and clothing folds and hair textures and proportions and body positions!  And making different characters look distinct!) and having things to show for it. I would soon use the money I saved to achieve greater independence in life, being able to take classes, go to events, and do volunteer work.  I would work on some new LOTR stories as well, as well as that stupid-long essay comparing the 9 members of The Fellowship of the Ring to those of Les Amis de l’ABC, since Tolkien was my obsession for the entirety of 2022, one of the longest ‘phases’ I’ve had.  Whether I’m still in it now is - a question.  The past few weeks I’ve had a passionate fling with Hercules: The Legendary Journeys again, but I may be reaching a sort of equilibrium again now, and returning to my older efforts.  My friends I visited in December inspired me with their skills and ideals and progress and love and encouragement.  I would follow, pursue my artistic passions, get a hold of my old chaos brain at last, make things happen!!  That was my New Year’s Resolution.

Of course, it hasn’t worked very well so far. I have the beginnings of two drawings (one of Frodo and Sam, one of Iolaus and Gabrielle) and added a couple short paragraphs to one or two of my fanfic efforts.  One was a Christmas-themed one, ironically enough.  Yesterday night and this morning I was edging toward despair about my lack of progress, my seeming inability to rule my own brain and put in the effort I wanted, accomplish the creative works I dreamed of.  But then I went to choir and sang many beautiful, heart-lifting songs, got back and ate delicious Mexican food, and watched an absolutely STIRRING documentary about Dr. Martin Luther King, about his message, his dream, his love, his sacrifice, followed by select bits from Captain America: The First Avenger, moments of friendship and camaraderie and courage with Steve and Bucky and Peggy, defying the odds and saving the day, and -- I really feel a lot better now.  Gotta stop putting ‘due dates’ on things so much, and getting bogged down beating myself up about what I haven’t done rather than putting effort into what I can do now!  “All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us” - and all that.  Yep, I’m a sap who always gets pulled out of self-loathing and despair by fictional and historical heroism, by powerful words and speeches and by the power of friendship.  So I hope I’ll have more to report next time!  I must first hope, and then make it so! 

Love to you all!  Goodnight! :)

[athemag]

interviews of Peter Mattei on french sites, including, as usual, some ramblings daring comparisons: Don G and Martin Luther King (2007), interpretation of Don G and caramel cream (2012)... 2006 - Liberation https://www.liberation.fr/culture/2006/12/22/mattei-joue-le-crooner-avec-von-otter_60917/?redirected=1 2007 - Altamusica http://www.altamusica.com/entretiens/document.php?action=MoreDocument&DocRef=3318&DossierRef=2957 2012 - Concertclassic https://www.concertclassic.com/article/une-interview-de-peter-mattei-baryton-jaurai-vraiment-du-mal-quitter-cette-production 2012 - Forumopera - 20 singers (including Peter Mattei) talk about Dietrich Fischer Dieskau https://www.forumopera.com/vingt-regards-sur-dietrich-fischer-dieskau/ 2019 - le blog de camille de rijck https://camillederijck.com/2022/03/12/one-quote-a-day-keeps-the-doctor-away-xv-peter-mattei-why-not-include-a-little-bit-of-elvis-in-classical-music/

an interesting interview of Malena Ernman in 2002 - with a short paragraph about Peter Mattei https://www.forumopera.com/v1/actu/malena.htm Opera National de Paris - 2017 Eugen Onegin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsX_W0hv5XQ&t=5s From the house of the dead https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny-egLJUxWI

[justforbooks]

Why is Bernard-Henri Lévy a public intellectual?

Before I picked up Bernard-Henri Lévy’s latest book, The Empire and the Five Kings, all I knew of him is that he’s a “public intellectual.” This phrase is used in nearly every description of Lévy (or BHL as he’s often called) and, along with Slavoj Žižek and Alain de Botton, he’s one of a handful of especially prominent public intellectuals in Europe. BHL’s that rare breed of thinker who is au fait with academic concepts, read by a popular audience, and can shape media conversations with just a few sentences of commentary.

Public intellectuals are often subject to derision from academic philosophers, who tend to view public engagement as a sign of lack of rigor, and so I wasn’t necessarily expecting traditional philosophy from Lévy’s book. But I didn’t expect to find such thoughtlessly pretentious writing.

The Empire and the Five Kings chronicles the decline of US influence abroad, and argues that five powers—China, Russia, Iran, Turkey and Sunni radical Islamism—are poised to rise in its place. Lévy spends most of the book outlining the threat to global order and vulnerable populations, such as the Kurds and the Uighurs, posed by these five powers, only to conclude by admitting that, in reality, the five kings have “major handicaps” in achieving global influence. In a few brief paragraphs, he explains that they’re economically and politically weak, and ill-suited to global rule. “I am reassured by the idea that these dashers of hopes, these sowers of death, have less chance than they think to generate a narrative capable of competing with that of the heirs of Athens, Rome, and Jerusalem,” he writes. The conclusion entirely undermines the 250 or so pages that came before it.

For evidence of Lévy’s shallow thinking, look no further than his brief discussion of the United States’ ills as an empire. In one short paragraph, he acknowledges the “extermination of the American Indian” but says this has “been duly mourned.” And he devotes just a single sentence to slavery: “Likewise, there is the bloody shadow cast for so long by the smug practice of slavery—but then came Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, and Barack Obama.” That’s it: The horrors of slavery answered with one legal act and three prominent African Americans.

Over the course of the book, any insight or analysis is obscured by florid jargon or lazy attempts to pack a poetic punch. A segue into the ills of social media, for example, includes the claim that “The banquet has become a farce, a motley bazaar where it is forbidden, under penalty of being hauled before the international court of anti-discriminatory struggle, to defame the Harlequin’s coat of one’s neighbor.” The “banquet,” in BHL’s analysis, is the banquet of “truth” served up by social media; the “Harlequin’s coat” refers to the idea that each of us stitched together a “patchwork of beliefs and certitudes from bloody shards that soon began to rot and stink.” BHL seems to be presenting the unoriginal analysis that social media has led people to develop very fixed opinions that fall in line with their social circle, and that critiquing these views can quickly lead to charges of being offensive. Not only is this interpretation simple, but in this case, it’s obscured by empty, elaborate language.

Philosophers are certainly prominently featured in BHL’s book—he references Heidegger, Hegel, Nietzsche, Plato, and Bentham, among others—but stops short of any meaningful exploration of their ideas. Lévy reminisces about an afternoon in a cafe with the philosopher Jean Hyppolite who was “endeavoring, text in hand, to tell us the story of America according to Hegel, while miming…the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis of Hegel’s and Marx’s dialectics.” He does not, however, bother to discuss details of the thesis/antithesis/synthesis structure of Hegelian and Marxian dialectics. Like many of BHL’s philosophical references, the line reads as though he’s showing off his own knowledge of these buzzwords, rather than sincerely engaging with the concepts.

Elsewhere, BHL recounts how his friend, businessman Jean-Baptiste Descroix-Vernier highlighted the risks of data, revealing people’s “origins, their beliefs, their inclinations” from internet browsing, and adds: “He had put his finger on the triple effect—hedonist, economic, and possibly tyrannical—that Foucault had anticipated in his theory of bio powers but did not live long enough to see put into practice. (The ‘encroachment of death,’ in Nietzschean terms, prevented Foucault from becoming old enough to savor his bitter victory.)” This sentence is not part of a broader discussion of Foucault’s or Nietzsche’s ideas only, again, a shallow reference to their existence.

I’m hardly the first to note that BHL is insufferable. It turns out the thinker is as renowned for his irritating grandiosity as for his public intellectual status. “Pomposity and self-promotion are his vices,” wrote Paul Berman in the New Yorker in 1995, adding: “[H]e ascended into the Parisian heavens of television celebrity and became famous for being smart—or was it for being famous?” A New York Times review of a book of letters Lévy co-authored with French author Michel Houellebecq said that the writing could have been “a brilliant satire on the vanity of writers.” But, alas, wrote Ian Buruma for the Times, it’s “all in deadly earnest.”

How did a man so often described as inane come to be regarded as a public intellectual? BHL first became famous in 1977 when he published La Barbarie à visage humain (Barbarism with a Human Face), which critiqued both far-right and far-left politics. The book quickly sold more than 100,000 copies, and is largely credited with pushing the left in France to be more critical of communist principles.

Lévy became known as the founder of the “New Philosophers,” a circle of male thinkers including André Glucksman, Alain Finkielkraut, and Pascal Bruckner, who were predominantly disavowed former Marxists, eager to critique the Soviet Union. France has a long history of philosophical “schools”; the most famous perhaps is the Jean-Paul Sartre school of existentialism. But, though the self-described “New Philosophers” modelled themselves in this vein, they were critiqued as vacuous. French philosopher Gilles Deleuze accused the New Philosophers of creating “philosophical marketing,” rather than a genuine school of thought.

Many academics and journalists are capable of writing popular books about politics. What sets BHL apart is his ability to court public attention. He inherited both immense wealth (his father financed a newspaper BHL founded, L’Imprévu; it lasted just 11 issues) and connections (his father was close friends with billionaire François Pinault, for example). He’s since made his own connections with politicians and film producers alike. He’s clearly adept at self-promotion and, as with so many famous and controversial men, he delights in creating news by making derogatory comments about women. BHL has stridently defended the French-Polish film director Roman Polanski who was convicted of rape, saying “there are degrees in the scale of crimes,” as well as Dominique Strauss Kahn, the former French director of the International Monetary Fund who was accused of sexual assault, saying the women who accused him sensed a “global opportunity”. It would certainly be appealing, for anyone who holds similarly misogynistic views, to hear them echoed by a man who claims to be an intellectual.

When we met in New York in February, I found BHL less irritating in person than he is in writing. He still showed signs of vanity: He wore his trademark white shirt with the top half unbuttoned, carefully presented his best angles for photographs, and looked into the distance throughout our conversation, as though to a distant crowd. But he’s less prone to lengthy pontifications while speaking. His commentary was far from profound, but came across more bland than pretentious.

For example, I asked him to clarify why he thought China, Russia, Iran, Turkey and radical Sunni Islamism were the nations currently most intent in gaining power—what evidence was he basing his theories on? “It’s what I saw when I was on the battlefield in Kurdistan,” he said, referring to the 2017 referendum for independence. “This is the place where I had the clear vision of this situation, when I saw my beloved French Kurds abandoned by America and delivered to our common enemies—”. Here he paused, and snapped his fingers in front of his face. “I had the evidence of the new geopolitical situation.” It seemed true to him, so why bother presenting evidence to us?

Throughout our conversation, BHL kept his mobile phone on the table, and occasionally picked up his phone and pressed a few buttons before putting it back down. He pocketed only when he started to critique public infatuation with social media. “I cannot understand how people can mistrust Le Monde or France Television and trust Facebook,” he said. “I would do the opposite. But at least, I would ask my fellow citizen to share the mistrust.”

While Lévy’s ideas are unremarkable, his ability to claim public attention is striking. His lengthy career is a reminder that cultivating a controversial persona to build fame and fortune is hardly a technique invented by reality TV or social media. At this point, barring some unforeseen controversy, there’s little chance BHL will lose his role as as a preeminent public intellectual. But that doesn’t mean we can’t learn from him in a different way: Lévy is a man immersed in the impersonation of intellect, and a reminder that we should choose our public intellectuals based on their ideas, rather than their performance.

Daily inspiration. Discover more photos at http://justforbooks.tumblr.com

[blahblahblaw18]

Overview of what’s on my mind :I

Namaste! I don’t know who you are and you don’t know me either. Let’s break the ice and get to know each other. Me first.

First of all, why the fuck is Grammarly not working here?! Do I have to become a premium member or something??

Anyhoo, my name is not really Indira or Lakshmi it is something else but I don’t want to reveal it so you will have to make do with those two names. Now I can’t tell you what my real name is or why I am not using it here but what I can tell you is why I have chosen the name I have chosen for a pseudonym. Indira Gandhi was a lady who is considered to be the most powerful Prime Minister India has ever had. She was honestly not a very good Prime Minister unlike her father, but even with the little knowledge that I have about her, I can tell you that she was certainly the best leader and the most convincing demagogue ever. I know that sounds paradoxical. How can you call someone a demagogue and then also say that the person is a good leader? Well, I think a good leader is someone who knows how to make the masses rally behind her and who can elevate herself to a cult status in the eyes of her people irrespective of the ideology of the person or the path the person chooses to follow. So, do I also think Hitler was a good leader? Yep. I do think Hitler was a successful leader... more so because he was able to persuade so many others (his followers) to live a life devoid of heart and brain and was even successful in convincing many of his era (some even to this day) that what he was doing was actually evangelical work. (P.S. I am NOT saying he was a good human. He was and will forever remain an arse who died like the coward that he was.) Applying the same principle even leaders like Narendra Modi, Barack Obama, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump (up to a certain extent), Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi can be attributed to being doyens. You must understand that the filter that I am applying here to classify them as good leaders is not whether they have done good or bad work but whether they were able to make the general public believe in them and their work just as much as they themselves did or not. So, in short, demagogues employing good rhetoric and having the ability to appeal to the hearts of the people, according to me, ARE fine leaders. Again, don’t confuse it with fine HUMANS. 

Gosh! that was quite a big explanation!! I am going to keep the next one short.

 So, Lakshmi. Now if you, who is reading this blog, are my ex-Boyfriend (I seriously don’t even want to bring that topic up cause even reminding myself that I was stupid enough to subject myself to that suffocating experience makes me want to retch.) you might want to think that Lakshmi is some kind of an eponym. If you were foolish enough to think that, then I am sorry to burst your bubble but NO! So, who is Lakshmi? To put it in a sentence (cause she is of a stature that is beyond being explicable in even a paragraph; that calls for a separate blog in itself.) she was a great freedom fighter, and I feel a much unsung one too, who gave up her life fighting for our freedom. But that is not what made me choose her name; there have been, as a matter of fact, many other leaders of equally gargantuan stature who’ve laid down their lives for us, their privileged future. But, many other aspects of her made me chose her in particular and as you may have guessed it already, her gender IS one of them though not the only one. Wait for my blog about her (or probably even a book, if and when I write it), which I assure you I will write as soon as possible, to know why I consider her as my idol.

Now, coming to the question of what this blog is going to be about and why I am writing it... 

This blog is not really a blog, I don’t intend to market this blog in any sort of way I am not even going to publicize it for certain obvious reasons (I am using an alternate identity here). The thing is off late I am going through some turbulent times and things haven’t really been, let’s just say, a cotton candy meal. I was feeling extremely lonely, (don’t misinterpret that; I do have friends and some very fine ones indeed but I just don’t feel like calling them every single day and rambling stuff into their ears) and the loneliness gave way to substance abuse... again do not be alarmed... it’s not so much substance abuse as it is internet addiction. Yup. I got myself hooked to the internet during the COVID induced lockdown and though the lockdown got over loooong ago my addiction didn’t vanish in a similar fashion. NETFLIX, YOUTUBE, INSTAGRAM YOUTUBE, TWITTER BUT MAINLY YOUTUBE... so to break that addiction and to make myself feel heard I’ve decided to engage myself by blogging ‘bout my thoughts and feelings. Here you may expect blogs on any topic that falls under the umbrella of my interest, i.e. I am going to write a little bit ‘bout my life, politics, history, my very very valuable opinion about anything and everything that goes on in this world, books, Benedict Cumberbatch, food, my friends and family, how and why my life sucks, cricket, Netflix series, Youtube videos, people I see around me, and just life in general.

And since this is only to fill the vacuum created by the lack of human interaction, or may I say lack of conversations where the other person is ready to only sit and listen to whatever I want to say, in my life; the blogs are going to be supremely candid and won’t involve grandiosity of any sorts. (Nope, not even grandiloquent words like grandiose unless they just slip off in the flow of writing like how grandiosity did in the last sentence and grandiloquent in this one.) 

You may at this point be like “WTF Indira as if our own thoughts weren’t enough! Why the fuck should I read about what you have to say?” and to that I can only say one thing... you really don’t have to read my blogs. They exist more because I want to write and need a medium where I can successfully be anonymous and vent out what goes on in my mind and less because I want you to read them. And since I am not advertising these blogs in anyway if you are reading this, then it means that you already want to read them... and I frankly don't have any objection to that. So now that you have read all the way till the end of this blog (or even if you have skipped most of it and reached here cause, let’s be honest, you in all possibilities have no better an attention span than that of a goldfish, which is very much my attention span too after all these days of internet addiction.), you may as well go ahead and indulge yourself, albeit vicariously, in the thoughts of my mind.

Oh, and by the way, I got this idea of writing blogs as a form of therapy from the Sherlock series on Netflix (starring the hot AF Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman). It is uhh-mayy-zingg! You should watch it too if you haven’t already.

My next blog is probably going to be about what is happening in my life and you will read more about why I chose to blog what’s on my mind.

See ya!  

26.8.20                                                                                                                    :I

[bnguyen732]

1.     As an introduction, tell us one little known fact about you.  

          My name is Brandon Nguyen. I grew up in Arizona and have currently been living in Florida for the past 6 years. I had originally moved to Florida to pursue an education in herpetology, eventually having to abandon my education due to personal predicaments. Fast forward a few years later, I now breed/sell reptiles as a hobby and I am currently working for a medical software company. I will be using the knowledge I attain from my studies at SCF to further my career with the company I work for.

 2.     Then, in list form, detail 5 new facts you were able to find out about your assigned artist or the artwork.

          I was assigned number 18 which is Betye Saar’s 1972 piece called The Liberation of Aunt Jemima.  

1. Betye Saar was known for an art called visual storytelling, where her art depicts a narrative story told by the art.

2. Betye Saar found the inspiration for the piece through a grocery list holder depicting aunt Jemimah.                            

3. Through her craft, Betye Saar played a large part in the black arts movement in the 1970’s.

4. Betye Saar decided to make this statement piece because she was so enraged by the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.

5. In the piece there is a vintage postcard showing a black woman holding a mixed child this was intentional to represent the sexual assault of black female slaves by white men.

3. Write a short paragraph (4 sentences) answering these questions: Did the way you think about the art change from the first time you looked at it? Do you see anything different in the art now?

        Yes, the way I thought about the artwork did change from the first time I looked at it. Honestly at first glance I was shocked by the blatant racist depiction of Aunt Jemima. After further researching about the piece, I found that it was a symbol of African American empowerment. The gun placed into Aunt Jemimas hand was a representation of power being taken back and the fist was a symbol of the black movements that had risen up.

[justcolorpiethings]

Green-White color pair

Green-White

Goal:  Attunement + Peace = Sanctified Life Defining Aspect:  Interdependence + Morality = Natural survival + Laws of Spirit = Sacredness Means:  Nature + Structure = "Tending the garden" Strength:  True + Structured = Resilient Weakness:  Naive + Uncreative = Indolent Thought

Green-White's goal is to place the obvious thing beyond the vicissitudes of mortal failing: to conserve and make inviolable the divine attribute of Life.  Peace protects Life from harm and injustice.  Green's gain is Attunement, through acceptance - fighting nothing, adjusting, and accommodating the natural currents that lead all down one destiny.  These are comprehensive visions of something defended, of a virtue 'joined to' if allowed to unfold.  Recall that Peace's strictures are supposed to be easy, at least in defining them.  White proposes that the good act can be known in advance and always is, it's just the discipline and structure we must furnish in ourselves to see it through.  Yet I would not make a mistake already warned against by Martin Luther King, and so the "presence of justice" in Peace is the move to affirmatively defend Life's virtue, via Sanctity.  Green-White sanctifies life, becoming a champion of it, adopting a duty over and above whatever social role it has, to propagate the sanctuarial reverence for that real thing.  From Sanctity, Green-White enjoys (and spreads) Peace and the Attunement of nature's pre-eminence.  Community enters into this as an expression of the equality and authority of Green-White's mission.  The mandate is the same to everyone.  Though our roles will be different when we Attune to our nature, the conformity of the mission of Sanctity builds strong ties, seen as the theme of Community.  The center of Green-White though, is still the Sacred.

Green-White is largely concerned with the difference of what it can change and what it cannot.  Change is something you do to deal with your own limitation within the grand scheme.  We have feeble hearts, so we eat well and on the regular.  We see only shadows of the Truth, so we speak conservatively and with kindness.  The community is enriched when we stand aside of our transient, short-lived wants to tend and nurture the more enduring, and common, needs, and the reciprocal bonds of society.  To Green-White, this is absolutely necessary, because Morality and Interdependence shout that there is a bigger picture we cannot take our eyes off of.  It is something to welcome us; but make no mistake that it will smash us when, in hubris, we try to think little of it.  It is something tough to do only for an egocentric culture.  Get along, don't reinvent the wheel.  The things you will do in life have been done by your ancestors.  Sacredness is the deference that Green-White has for 'the big picture', Creation, or God-as-the-world.  So is it, don't change it because you can't, or you shouldn't?  "Yes."  The Sacred is a symbolic place of where answers come from.  It's the thing that IS everything and the needs of everything, the necessity of itself, and the tautology of the Categorical Imperative (see next paragraph).  Green-White is trying to accept everything, to defend each thing so it can meet its purpose, and that means Green-White is a color of fierce principles.

I hold an idiosyncratic view of Kant's Categorical Imperative, so I'll lay out that view and then others might see it relate to White as I do.  The CI is an "idea", at least, a concept, whatever those are separately from anyone actually thinking them.  Perhaps the term 'meme' can be attached to it.  The idea goes, 'that I should act only according to a maxim, which I could simultaneously will to become a universal law.'  The derivation from this, though, is that it shall be a universal process, that agents will harbor a form of thought like this.  For whenever the meme space (like the gene space) comes to have such categorical maxims, their alternates, viz. maxims that must not be willed to become universal law, would of course not be moved to become universal by any of that acting and willing.  What can be seen to take up the place of the common, the widespread, the universal, will only be any patterns of tending to hold and engender thought adhering to the CI.  It is a concept that makes its own propagation inevitable, like the selfish genes of Darwin, and the selfish memes of Dawkins.  And so, the pursuit of Law, law in *reason* and action and society, could be called a fundamental force of any universe.  White's characteristic is secured as basic and indivisible.  Above, I have mixed this idea of Law as self-producing, into the view of Nature in Green of the necessary, unstoppable progress of Destiny.  They match, right?

Green-White has its principles, and what these principled defenders have in front of them, is the task of making space for the World to happen, for other people to play their part.  It's perhaps a troubling task, that has no specified accomplishment to "do".  There is much more in what must not be done.  Yet it is what it is.  Nature's tools are those of allowing growth, strength, life; in short to be concerned with the Real and with nourishment.  The body needs its energy, and the mind needs compassion, kindness, and love.  Structure's tools are preparation, manufacture, and focus, the use of systemic thinking to put problems to rest, to solve stressors, to make peace.  Living systems can get by on their own, but thrive even greater with guided and guarded development.  In a word, Green-White tends a garden, trying to let everything in, using some rearrangement here and there, but otherwise to give over to what the garden becomes.  The garden is of course inside as well.  There's no distinction between self and other, in any of this.  Care, kindness, social bonds - it's all worth doing and all part of the same, self-satisfying project, of that Sanctified Life.

This outright wholesomeness - yes - really is Green-White's greatest strength.  It doesn't buckle.  Knock it down, bruise it, distract it, it will not forget the eternal purpose.  Unlike any more anti-social school of thought, you cannot divide Green-White from within, you cannot make it nervously check over its back, and you *cannot* make it give up.  Sure, you can give it a moral dilemma.  Mortality is also vexing.  It knows frailty all too well.  But that is literally what keeps it going, what keeps it practicing, what keeps it trying its best.  Addressing and mending whatever frailty it can.  And, of course, there is the community.  When one hurts its limb, all hold the wound.

Toward this color's great weakness.  Mark Rosewater motioned to the idea of Green-White getting stuck in its ways, unable to "innovate".  It is difficult to try on an idea while thinking for everyone else's sake, true.  I prefer the concept outlined in Duncan Sabien's article, of a drifting off target.  Good intentions, out-of-touch methods.  Averaging the two, what you get is indolence, in thought at least.  Green-White's paradisical headspace, when living fulfillingly as it does, can become a lackadaisical one.  Making its community work can be something Green-White gets wrapped up in, repetitive as it is, and then it may not do much as far as thinking about what lies beyond today.  Naivety and Inflexibility: it isn't about innovation, it's about making itself move.  The thinking Green-White gives to the cause of Community, is done precisely without stepping outside that value system.  The Sacred way prioritizes the caring, kindness, and contemplation explicitly over the abstract or self-driven.  Wondering, reimagining, pushing limits?  There's just no room for such experiments.  That's the box it's in: to have foresworn those priorities.  To go outside it, is to stop being Green-White.  It is what it is.

[makinghistory2021]

A brief history of gun laws and gun control in the United States of America:

In the complex and emotionally charged debate around gun control in the United States, the Second Amendment, the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights are perpetually utilised by gun advocates and the like to defend their personal rights to bear arms.

The American Constitution:

The Constitution of the United States came into fruition in 1789, as the ‘supreme law’, and interestingly was written to ‘create a government with enough power to act on a national level, but without so much power that fundamental rights would be at risk.’ (1) It was also put in place to establish a relationship between all states of the US, and in turn solidify that all states are to give “full faith and credit” to the laws, records and contracts and judicial proceedings of other states. For over 200 years, the American Constitution has remained in force because its authors separated governmental powers to safeguard the interests of majority rule and of the maintain the balance of federal and state governments. (2)

Figure 1: The first paragraph of the American Constitution, highlighting the first three words “We the People” (2)

It was ensured when writing the Constitution that it could be amended, and since then, it has been amended 27 times. The first 10 amendments have collectively become known as the Bill of Rights. The most important amendment within this project however, is the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment ensures the right of Americans to keep and bear arms, put into place on the 15th of December, 1791. (3)

Colonial America viewed the rights to bear arms important for many reasons, such as:

- Enabling and organising a militia system

- Participating in law enforcement

- Safeguarding against tyrannical government

- Repelling invasion

- Suppressing insurrection, including slave revolts

- Facilitating the natural right of self defence (4)

Figure 2: The Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed” (5)

The first gun control laws:

The first gun control law was implemented in 1934, after the infamous St Valentine’s Day Massacre of 1929 The National Firearms Act was introduced, imposing tax on the manufacturing, selling and transporting of firearms, including short-barrel shotguns, machine guns, rifles and silencers. (6) Two more acts were introduced in the 1930′s prohibiting convicted felons from owning weapons, and enforcing stronger regulations on short-barrel shotguns. (6)

Following the assassinations of John F Kennedy, Attorney General and US Senator Robert F Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson pushed through the Gun Control Act of 1968. This bill banned the importation of guns that had no “sport purpose”, and imposed an age restriction of 21 for the purchase of handguns. Also, the mentally ill, and felons were unable to purchase any weapons, and all imported guns were to be marked with a serial number. (7)

Again in 1993, another devastating event needed to occur for further gun laws to be introduced. The Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act of 1993 was named after White House press secretary James Brady was permanently disabled during an attempt on President Ronald Reagan’s life. This law, signed in by Bill Clinton, requires background checks for purchases to be completed by licensed gun dealers, manufacturers and importers. From there, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) was created. (8) One year later, the banning of “manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon,” unless it was “lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.” Nineteen military-style or “copycat” assault weapons—including AR-15s, TEC-9s, MAC-10s - were banned. (9)

District of Columbia vs Heller, 2008:

Historically the case District of Columbia vs Heller, has become the most important modern interpretation of the Second Amendment, with it being the first case since 1939 to explore the meaning of the Second Amendment out of a Colonial setting. In 2008, Richard Heller, a victim of gun violence who claimed he would not have been injured if he had not been previously denied an application for a handgun within his home, challenged the motion decided in 2003 that “prohibited the carrying of unlicensed handguns or any other deadly or dangerous weapon capable of being concealed, and required that lawfully stored firearms be disassembled or locked to prevent firing” claiming the ban of handguns was unconstitutional. (10) Ultimately, the court agreed with Heller, interpreting the Second Amendment as a guarantee of the individual rights to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia, and in turn one should be allowed to hold a firearm for a traditionally lawful purpose including self defense. (11)

Figure 3: The final paragraph in the dictation of the District of Columbia vs Heller case, 2008, marking the end of the court hearing. (12)

This landmark decision lead to a quick rise in gun law analysis. Prominent American lawyer and academic Don B. Kates in his paper A Modern Historiography of the Second Amendment explores the apparent inherent racist undertones of gun control, cites the examples of Nazi Germany removing all firearms rights from German Jews, highlighting how 18th century English academic Francis Place believed that anti-semitism in England diminished due to English-Jews learning to defend and arm themselves and how the assumption of the right to bear arms as a human right removes race superiority, particularly in America. (13) 

Conversely, using the same filter of racism, academics such as Alicia Granse believes that current gun control laws are implicitly racist towards “blacks”, stemming from the idea that the second amendment was enforced to halt uprisings of slaves in colonial america, and this racist undertone has followed all gun mandates in America. In turn, Granse states that without gun control strengthening and reforms, “black Americans and other minorities will continue to be over-policed, over-searched, over-prosecuted, and over-incarcerated for exercising their Second Amendment rights.. What will make these reforms politically difficult is exactly what makes them necessary-to eliminate one more instance of the racialized social control of Black people through ‘colorblind’ legislation”. (14) This is one of many examples highlighting the ever contradictory discourse academically surrounding what should be done about gun control and gun laws in the US. 

[pamalamherron92]

20 Repetition Examples Worth Repeating (+10 Repetition Types)

We see repetition examples everywhere — in books, movies, music, and even commercials.

Advertisers use repetition to craft catchy slogans that entice us to buy. Musicians use it to create songs that get stuck in our heads. Politicians use it to persuade nations.

But you? 

How can you use repetition to spice up your writing and make it memorable?

I’ll show you how. 

But first, we need to start with the basics. So let’s define repetition then jump into some examples. 

Shall we?

What is Repetition? 

Repetition is a literary device where words or phrases repeat for emphasis. 

There are several types of repetition. For instance, alliteration is the repetition of consonant sounds. 

You might remember this consonance example from your childhood:

“Sally sells seashells by the seashore.”

Sound familiar?

But repetition is used for more than just childhood tongue twisters. If used correctly, it’ll strengthen your writing by:

Emphasizing your message

Boosting memorability

Adding rhythm

Linking ideas or topics together

But I should issue a warning.

There’s a fine line between repetition and redundancy.

For example, take the following paragraph:

He raced to the grocery store. He went inside but realized he forgot his wallet. He raced back home to grab it. Once he found it, he raced to the car again and drove back to the grocery store.

“Raced” is repeated, but it doesn’t strengthen the sentences. Instead, it sounds like the author couldn’t think of better word choices.  

What follows, then, is too many filler words that confuse the reader and lose their attention. 

Now compare that redundant paragraph to this repetition example:

It was the best of times,

it was the worst of times,

it was the age of wisdom,

it was the age of foolishness,

Do you see how compelling that is? 

It’s the opening to Charles Dickens’ novel, A Tale of Two Cities. 

Dickens’ repetition draws his readers in and encourages them to keep turning the page. 

Can it do the same for you and your audience?

Yes. 

Let’s show you how to replicate this with more examples.

10 Types of Repetition with Examples 

Repetition is an umbrella literary device that includes more specific types of stylistic tools, like alliteration, epistrophe, diacope, and others. 

And here’s a hint:

Each type of repetition serves a unique purpose. The one you choose depends on what you’re trying to convey. 

So let’s talk about that next. 

1. Anaphora 

Anaphora is the repetition of words at the beginning of successive clauses. 

It’s common in music, poems, and children’s books that have a rhyming element.

For example, Nico and Vinz’s song “Am I Wrong?” features this anaphora:

So am I wrong for thinking that we could be something for real?

Now am I wrong for trying to reach the things that I can’t see?

Listen to how catchy this line sounds below:

Anaphora can also be used in speeches to motivate people. Dr. Martin Luther King’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech included this repetition example:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

See what I mean? 

Repetition not only emphasized Dr. King’s point, but it made it more memorable and quotable. 

2. Epizeuxis

Epizeuxis is the repetition of a word or phrase in immediate succession. 

Winston Churchill used epizeuxis in his address to Harrow School:

Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty-never give in, except to convictions of honor and good sense.

How’s that for a commencement speech?

Churchill was known for his inspiring speeches that were packed full of powerful words and rhetorical devices. 

But while repetition examples are common in speeches, they don’t stop there. Writers have used repetition for ages.

For example, in King Lear, William Shakespeare wrote:

And my poor fool is hanged! No, no, no life!

Why should a dog, a horse, a rat have life,

And thou no breath at all? Thou’lt come no more,

Never, never, never, never!

In the scene above, King Lear is grieving the death of his daughter. The use of epizeuxis is a perfect choice for this scene because it strengthens the emotion.

3. Epistrophe 

Epistrophe, also called “epiphora,” uses repetition at the end of independent clauses or sentences. 

Many writers and speakers use epistrophe to drive home their points. 

Abraham Lincoln achieved this in his “Gettysburg Address”:

Government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Powerful, isn’t it?

Many musicians also love using repetition to add a regular rhythm to their songs and make them catchy. 

And they’re right. 

We see it in Beyonce’s “Single Ladies” song:

‘Cause if you liked it then you shoulda put a ring on it

If you liked it then you shoulda put a ring on it

Don’t be mad once you see that he want it

4. Negative-Positive Restatement

A negative-positive restatement states an idea twice, first in negative terms and then in positive terms. These are typically “not this, but that” statements. 

For example:

“Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country,” said John F. Kennedy. 

Another famous negative-positive restatement comes from Martin Luther King. He said, “Freedom is not given; it is won.”

5. Diacope  

Diacope is the repetition of a single word or phrase, separated by intervening words. It comes from the Greek word thiakhop, which means “cutting in two.”

My favorite example comes from Michael Jordan. He said:

“I’ve failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.” 

Jordan first said this in a Nike ad. You can watch this short commercial below. I promise you won’t be disappointed:

Speaking of commercials, Maybelline uses a diacope in their tagline when they say, “Maybe she’s born with it; maybe it’s Maybelline.”

6. Epanalepsis 

Epanalepsis repeats words or phrases at the beginning and the end of the same sentence or clause. 

For example:

“Control, control, you must learn control,” said Yoda in The Empire Strikes Back.

Check it out:

Epanalepsis puts a heavy emphasis on the idea you’re trying to convey. 

It also uses the “primacy” and “recency” effects which means the first and last thing we hear is more likely to stick in our minds. 

Some politicians love this technique. Politicians like John F. Kennedy. 

He used this repetition example in his address to the United Nations:

Mankind must put an end to war — or war will put an end to mankind.

7. Epimone

Epimone uses repetition to dwell on a point. It’s commonly used in stories where a character is pleading or commanding someone to do something. 

We saw it in Oliver Goldsmith’s play, She Stoops to Conquer: 

I tell you, sir, I’m serious! And now that my passions are roused, I say this house is mine, sir; this house is mine, and I command you to leave it directly.

Epimone is also used to illustrate persistence. For example, in Webster’s address to the Senate, he said:

The cause, then, Sir, the cause! Let the world know the cause which has thus induced one State of the Union to bid defiance to the power of the whole, and openly to talk of secession.

8. Polyptoton 

Polyptoton involves the repetition of words that derive from the same root word. 

Here’s a famous quote from John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton:

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Remember that one?

“Absolute” and “absolutely” are different words, but they derive from the same root word. 

Polyptoton is common in headlines and book titles too. 

Heidi Murkoff’s popular book on pregnancy is titled What to Expect When You’re Expecting

Here’s a screenshot of the cover page:

9. Antistasis 

Antistasis uses repetition to contrast two ideas. It derives from the Greek meaning “to stand against” or “opposing position.”

For example, when someone asks you:

“Are you working hard or hardly working?”

That’s an antistasis example because it contrasts two ideas on work. 

Advertisers use this technique too. The tagline of the Starkist Tuna commercials was:

“Sorry, Charlie. StarKist wants tuna that tastes good, not tuna with good taste.“

Do you see how the combination of those contrasting ideas makes you stop and think? 

That’s the goal. 

10. Antanaclasis 

Antanaclasis repeats the same word or phrase but with a different meaning each time. This repeated phrase is also known as a pun because it’s a play on words. 

Benjamin Franklin used it when he said, “Your argument is sound, nothing but sound.” 

In the first part, he said the argument is solid. In the second, he discounted it as noise. 

Vince Lombardi, a famous football coach, also used antanaclasis when he stated:

“If you aren’t fired with enthusiasm, you will be fired with enthusiasm.”

See how easy that is?

Stating the same phrases in a different way makes them wittier.

Examples of Repetition in Literature 

Surprise, surprise:

Some of the best repetition examples come from books and poems.

It didn’t take long for many of the world’s most famous writers — like Shakespeare and Maya Angelou — to understand the power of this rhetorical device.

For example, Romeo and Juliet, Shakespeare used repetition when he said:

Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow.

Oh, woeful, oh woeful, woeful, woeful day!

In F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel, The Great Gatsby, he used repetition in successive phrases to emphasize his point:

The apartment was on the top floor-a small living-room, a small dining-room, a small bedroom, and a bath.

The repeated word “small” highlights to the reader how tiny Tom’s apartment is.

Maya Angelou also knew how to use this literary technique to her advantage. In her poem, Still I Rise, she said:

Leaving behind nights of terror and fear

I rise

Into a daybreak that’s wondrously clear

I rise

Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,

I am the dream and the hope of the slave.

I rise

I rise

I rise.

This repetition in poetry emphasizes Angelou’s main point and signifies her strength. 

Famous Examples of Repetition in Pop Culture 

Repetition is common in music because it makes it easy to sing along with the lyrics.

Here’s an example from Elvis Presley’s “Hound Dog”:

You ain’t nothin’ but a hound dog

Cryin’ all the time

You ain’t nothin’ but a hound dog

Cryin’ all the time

We also see repetition all the time in movies. 

Why?

Because it gives us quotable movie lines that stand the test of time. Here’s a famous repetition example from Taxi Driver:

You talkin’ to me? You talkin’ to me? You talkin’ to me? Then who the hell else are you talkin’ to? You talkin’ to me? Well, I’m the only one here.

Hear this quote in action:

And then, of course, another famous repetition example comes from the James Bond series. James Bond always introduces himself as “Bond. James Bond.”

Why Write with Repetition? 

Let me ask you:

If there was an easy way to be more memorable, would you do it?

And if you could easily add emphasis to your message, would you do it?

Of course you would. 

Just by using repeated patterns in one sentence or paragraph, you can:

Make your point more convincing

Increase memorability

Add flow to your writing

Make your words rhyme

Link topics or ideas together

Think of it this way.

There’s a reason why some of history’s most famous speakers used repetition. Winston Churchill, JFK, and Martin Luther King used it because it works. 

It makes your writing more persuasive, quotable, and memorable. And in writing, that’s considered the triple threat. 

Ready to Put These Repetition Examples to Work?

Using repetition is simple.

Start by choosing an idea that you want to emphasize. Then repeat words that stress that idea and make your prose more quotable. 

But a friendly reminder:

Don’t overuse repetition. Just use it on thoughts or ideas that you want to carry a significant impact, or else it’ll lose its effect. 

Remember my redundancy example from earlier?

You don’t want to look like a lazy writer who couldn’t find a better way to word your message.

Instead, use it like David Schwartz when he said:

“The mind is what the mind is fed.”

See how that works? Now go try it for yourself.

You’ve got this. 

The post 20 Repetition Examples Worth Repeating (+10 Repetition Types) appeared first on Smart Blogger.

from SEO and SM Tips https://smartblogger.com/repetition-examples/

[forsetti]

On Writing: The Wrong Frame Of Mind To Write

For the past year, writing has been a struggle.  At first, I thought this was because it was impossible to stay on top of the amount of bullshit being pumped out by President Narcissist and his band of deplorables.  By the time I got through writing the first paragraph on something that happened, three more things would occur that were equally or more upsetting.  Trying to figure out what to write about and how felt overwhelming.  It's been over a year and we've all become acclimated on some level to the non-stop nonsense coming from this administration.  Yet, I'm struggling as much today with writing as I was after the Inauguration.  This reason might be part of the cause but it isn't the main reason I'm finding it hard to write.

Another reason I've been telling myself why I'm finding writing difficult is because I'm emotionally drained and pre-occupied after the end of the best relationship I've ever been in. With my emotions so focused on and so damaged by the breakup, I didn't have the mental energy and focus to also write.  This can't be the reason for the struggle writing either.  Writing has always been an emotional release, for me.  It doesn't matter what the emotion-anger, frustration, grief... If anything, the end of my relationship should have spurred a desire to write.  It didn't.  Again, this might be part of the cause as to why I've been finding it hard to write but it isn't the main reason.

I certainly believe that Trump's election and the end of my relationship have had an impact, separately and taken together, on my writing, but neither one is the main, underlying cause of my writer's block.

It wasn't until this past week after reading an article suggested to me by a good friend and a Twitter thread by someone I've been following for the past couple of years that I really understood why I've been struggling-I have fucks to give.  The two articles I read were written by people who are passionate about what they write, willing to say what others sometimes don't want to but need to be said, completely honest about themselves and brutally honest about the world around them.  They write with zero fucks to give.

The first thing I read-”Awkward and Beautiful Things You Think and Do When You Might Be Dying,” was written by Emily Dievendorf who was diagnosed with a brain tumor eleven years ago and is in a limbo state when it comes to really knowing her prognosis.  The sometimes brutal, sometimes funny, sometimes uncomfortable, sometimes inspiring honesty in her article came from a place of no fucks to give. As I read it, I was both impressed and envious of her ability to lay it on the table, no-holds-barred.

The second thing I read was written by Propane Jane, a black woman who is not only a psychiatrist with her Masters in Public Health but a legend of the brutally honest Twitter thread.  The thread I read the other day was about Bernie Sanders' recent comments about President Obama and the Democratic Party while he was speaking in Mississippi during the 50th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King's assassination.  While some people were pointing out some of the problems with Bernie's comments, Propane Jane brought the fucking receipts, threw them down on the table in a perfectly laid out, organized fashion, and dropped the mic all in very succinct tweets. There are a few people on Twitter who are really good at a Tweet Storm.  Propane Jane is the best of the best at it.  It wasn't so much what she had to say about Bernie's comments that struck me, it was how I reminded just how powerful and wonderful something written with zero fucks to give can be.

These two women, coming from very different perspectives on very different topics showed me what has been missing from my writing the past year.  I've been struggling with writing because for some reason I have had fucks to give and it goes against who I am and why I started writing in the first place.  

When I started my blog seven years ago, it wasn't for anyone but myself. It was a place where I could write down whatever was swirling around in my brain.  It was a place where my stream of consciousness could take on a tangible form.  The handful of people who followed it were a few close friends who know me really well and have heard the live versions of what I write many times over drinks.  This all changed right after the 2016 election.

For reasons I've never fully understood, my blog post right after the presidential election in 2016 about rural voters got picked up by Alternet and later Raw Story (who has run it at least three different times.)  Instead of the few dozen shares and reads most of the things I'd write would get, this essay went viral and was exposed to millions of people.  Within a short period of time, the number of people following my blog went from a handful to over a thousand.  The same was true with my corresponding Forsetti's Justice Facebook page. As much as I appreciate everyone who follows and enjoys what I write and post, they are the reason I'm having a hard time writing.  Well, not them specifically but as a catalyst which brought out a trait in me, I thought I'd successfully dealt with years ago.

When it was just me writing for myself into a fairly unpopulated space, I never thought about how it would be perceived, if it was important, if it was interesting, if it was anything.  For some reason, on some level, now I do.  Being the oldest of ten kids instilled an over-developed sense of responsibility that always bothered the fuck out of me.  When I'm on my own or with a small group of carefully selected friends, this sense of responsibility dissipates.  When I'm in large groups or around people I don't really know very well, this sense is heightened.  The difference between these two situations is the lower the sense of responsibility, the fewer fucks I give. Having a lot of people follow and read my stuff has caused this sense of responsibility to kick into high gear.  Don't get me wrong, the people who follow and read my stuff are not to blame in any way for by writer's block.  The problem completely rests with me.  I need to figure out how to go back to writing for myself.

I need to once again not care if anyone reads what I write and just write.  I need to have no filters in any step of what or why I write/post.  I have to get back to having zero fucks to give because deep down, I know exactly what I want to accomplish, why, and how to get there better than anyone else.  There are much, much, much better writers than me.  In fact, I don't even consider myself a writer because I spend no time working on the art and craft of writing.  My “editing process” consists of a rudimentary spellcheck and not much else.  The main reason I write is to get thoughts, connections, emotions out of my head and these are almost always loosely structured and certainly not grammatically correct.  It is mostly a stream of consciousness but a stream that has been hewn into bedrock by years of reading and studying philosophy, health care, economics, politics, world civilizations, religion...  I know my wheelhouse and need to feel completely comfortable in it again. The people who read what I write are probably not even aware of any of this.  I am and it needs to stop.

Now that I've figured out the problem, it is up to me to figure out how to fix it.  Hopefully, I can.  I just have to figure out how to not care about who reads what I write and what their response might be. I need to be comfortable in my own skin and with my own abilities.  I need to get back to writing like the two women whose works brought to light the flaw in what I've been doing, exposed the cause of the problem.  However, unlike either of them, I will always come from a place where not having any fucks will never be as risk-taking as what they do because as an older, white, straight male, any risk I take will always be done from a position of cultural acceptance and power. This is something I'm not in control of much more than being keenly aware of the situation.  What is completely in my control is the amount of fucks give when writing.  I've been giving too many lately and it has got to stop because deep down, this isn't why I write and isn't who I want to be.

[brainstatic]

OK, this genre of pearl-clutching about college kids not being racist enough is overdone enough as it is, but this article by noted blowhard Jonathan Haidt is too much. I have to rant about this piece of shit.

What is happening to our country, and our universities? It sometimes seems that everything is coming apart.

This is a complaint found in every generation in every civilization on the planet. We have written records of ancient Greeks and Romans making this exact same whine.

Anyway, then there’s a brief summary of cosmology 101 because we’re in for the biggest historical stretch ever.

I’d like you to consider an idea that I’ll call “the fine-tuned liberal democracy.” It begins by looking backward a few million generations and tracing our ancestry, from tree-dwelling apes to land-dwelling apes, to upright-walking apes, whose hands were freed up for tool use, to larger-brained hominids who made weapons as well as tools, and then finally to homo sapiens, who painted cave walls and painted their faces and danced around campfires and worshipped gods and murdered each other in large numbers.

But enough about the 2016 Republican National Convention.

Here is the fine-tuned liberal democracy hypothesis: as tribal primates, human beings are unsuited for life in large, diverse secular democracies, unless you get certain settings finely adjusted to make possible the development of stable political life. This seems to be what the Founding Fathers believed.

I’m not sure the slave-owners were as committed to diverse and secular democracy as you think.

Thankfully, our Founders were good psychologists. They knew that we are not angels; they knew that we are tribal creatures.

Yet they completely failed to anticipate hyper-partisanship, an oversight that will be remembered as the one that caused America’s downfall.

So what did the Founders do? They built in safeguards against runaway factionalism, such as the division of powers among the three branches, and an elaborate series of checks and balances.

No, they were not concerned with factionalism, they were afraid of three things: tyrants, unqualified demagogues, and leaders beholden to foreign powers. Bang up jobs guys.

What would Jefferson say if he were to take a tour of America’s most prestigious universities in 2017?

Thomas Jefferson owned people and didn’t know what bacteria is, who gives a shit.

Why do we hate and fear each other so much more than we used to as recently as the early 1990s? The political scientist Sam Abrams and I wrote an essay in 2015, listing ten causes. I won’t describe them all, but I’ll give you a unifying idea, another metaphor from physics: keep your eye on the balance between centrifugal and centripetal forces. Imagine three kids making a human chain with their arms, and one kid has his free hand wrapped around a pole. The kids start running around in a circle, around the pole, faster and faster. The centrifugal force increases. That’s the force pulling outward as the human centrifuge speeds up. But at the same time, the kids strengthen their grip. That’s the centripetal force, pulling them inward along the chain of their arms. Eventually the centrifugal force exceeds the centripetal force and their hands slip. The chain breaks. This, I believe, is what is happening to our country. I’ll briefly mention five of the trends that Abrams and I identified, all of which can be seen as increasing centrifugal forces or weakening centripetal forces.

This is the metaphor that underpins the rest of the article. It’s admittedly interesting, too bad he applies it in the most asinine ways possible.

External enemies: Fighting and winning two world wars, followed by the Cold War, had an enormous unifying effect.

We put Japanese people in camps and spent the 50s afraid our neighbors could be communist spies, but sure, unifying, right.

The Vietnam War was different, but in general, war is the strongest known centripetal force.

War brings people together except for that one time it tore the country apart. Also all the other times.

Immigration and diversity: This one is complicated and politically fraught. Let me be clear that I think immigration and diversity are good things, overall.

I smell a “but” coming.

The economists seem to agree that immigration brings large economic benefits. The complete dominance of America in Nobel prizes, music, and the arts, and now the technology sector, would not have happened if we had not been open to immigrants.

So we agree immigrants are the only ones doing the things which future generations will remember us fondly for.

But

There it is.

as a social psychologist, I must point out that immigration and diversity have many sociological effects, some of which are negative.

This is from someone who just implied the World Wars had no meaningful negative side effects and Vietnam was just a big oopsie.

The political scientist Robert Putnam found this in a paper titled “E Pluribus Unum,” in which he followed his data to a conclusion he clearly did not relish: “In the short run, immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital. New evidence from the US suggests that in ethnically diverse neighborhoods residents of all races tend to ‘hunker down.’ Trust (even of one’s own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer.”

That’s questionable, but notice how it specifies “in the short run.” What does Putnam have to say about the long run? Let’s take a quote from the abstract from that very link: “In the long run immigration and diversity are likely to have important cultural, economic, fiscal, and developmental benefits.” Weird that Haidt left that part out, he’s so committed to diversity.

I repeat that diversity has many good effects too, and I am grateful that America took in my grandparents from Russia and Poland, and my wife’s parents from Korea. But Putnam’s findings make it clear that those who want more diversity should be even more attentive to strengthening centripetal forces.

And yet you left out that Putnam agrees with you.

The final two causes I will mention are likely to arouse the most disagreement, because these are the two where I blame specific parties, specific sides. They are: the Republicans in Washington, and the Left on campus. Both have strengthened the centrifugal forces that are now tearing us apart.

Haidt sees too equivalent forces at work: the party that dominates every lever of government, makes all laws, controls the presidency and all executive departments, and the majority of state governments. On the other side, there’s a 19-year-old Oberlin student who wrote about safe spaces for the school newspaper.

The more radical Republican Party: When the Democrats ran the House of Representatives for almost all of six decades, before 1995, they did not treat the Republican minority particularly well.

Those six decades included long periods where Dixiecrats voted with Republicans more often than with their own party, giving Republicans a functional majority. There were also the so-called “Rockefeller Republicans”, socially liberal Republicans named after their de fact leader, New York governor Nelson Rockefeller. They voted with Democrats a good chunk of the time. This blended partisan makeup sort of kills his whole belief in the permanent partisanship of American politics, so I don’t expect him to mention it, if he knows about it at all. I don’t know how Democrats mistreated Republicans during this period, maybe by almost impeaching their profoundly criminal president?

The new identity politics of the Left: Jonathan Rauch offers a simple definition of identity politics: a “political mobilization organized around group characteristics such as race, gender, and sexuality, as opposed to party, ideology, or pecuniary interest.” Rauch then adds: “In America, this sort of mobilization is not new, unusual, un­American, illegitimate, nefarious, or particularly left­wing.” This definition makes it easy for us to identify two kinds of identity politics: the good kind is that which, in the long run, is a centripetal force. The bad kind is that which, in the long run, is a centrifugal force.

Yes, I’m sure Haidt does find it quite easy to separate the civil rights movements he likes and those he doesn’t like. I’m going to predict the ones he likes are the ones led by dead people who aren’t here to make him uncomfortable. I predict the I Have A Dream speech will make an appearance.

When slavery was written into the Constitution, it set us up for the greatest explosion of our history. It was a necessary explosion, but we didn’t manage the healing process well in the Reconstruction era. When Jim Crow was written into Southern laws, it led to another period of necessary explosions, in the 1960s.

While I would contest that racial strife happened in fits and bursts, and not in a long continuous stream, I appreciate that Haidt acknowledges the thing that torpedoes his first billion paragraphs about the Founders’ commitment to peace and justice.

Martin Luther King’s rhetoric made it clear that this was a campaign to create conditions that would allow national reconciliation. He drew on the moral resources of the American civil religion to activate our shared identity and values: “When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note.” And: “I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’

Called it.

Of course, some people saw the civil rights movement as divisive, or centrifugal.

“Some people” meaning the FBI and the guy who shot him.

But what happens when young people study intersectionality? In some majors, it’s woven into many courses. Students memorize diagrams showing matrices of privilege and oppression.

That has never happened.

Intersectionality is like NATO for social-justice activists.

I have no words.

Can you imagine a culture that is more antithetical to the mission of a university? Can you believe that many universities offer dozens of courses that promote this way of thinking? Some are even requiring that all students take such a course.

I’m only in my first year of grad school for linguistics but I can tell you that it’s literally impossible without an understanding of intersectionality.

Anyway, the rest of the article is just rephrasing the first parts, and then he plugs his website called “The Heterodox Academy” (it means “unconventional.”) Being unconventional or contrarian is like being rich: if you have to tell people you are, you’re probably not. The purported goal of this website is to challenge “conventional thinking” that became conventional supposedly without evidence. The ones listed in their FAQ are:

Humans are a blank slate, and “human nature” does not exist.

No one has believed this since the 60s, so you can triumphantly cross that one off your list.

All differences between human groups are caused by differential treatment of those groups, or by differential media portrayals of group members.

Groups? What groups? Like, theater nerds, history buffs, professional bowlers? Oh you mean races, your goal is to promote race science, got it.

Social stereotypes do not correspond to any real differences.

In case it wasn’t clear this was about racism.

In conclusion, Johnathan Haidt is racist buffoon and the only injustice at work is that he was ever given respect in the first place.

[howtomakemyessaylonger730]

essay writer

About me

Contoh Essay Lpdp Kontribusi Untuk Indonesia

Contoh Essay Lpdp Kontribusi Untuk Indonesia Essay on disadvantages of sentimental drinks, expressing emotions essayshaheed ki jo maut hai wo kom ki hayat hai essay in urdu. Case study research advantagebooks are our pals essay in malayalam, nursing case research grief? Dissertation on manurewhich can be the easiest way to arrange an essay describing utilizing the same essay for different courses. Skins essayessay language change instance? Daring incident essaymy future profession enterprise essay residing in massive city or staying in village essayhow to put in writing an essay a couple of debate. Short essay about honesty, essay on a wedding in my family essay Introduction christianity for essay on dussehra in hindi literary essay for third grade essay hook about change. How to reference a picture in an essay essay on martin luther king junior. Essay on tree for sophistication 10 good essay for school college students. Diwali quick essay in gujarati, ny times faculty essays 2015. Reference essay harvard type essay conclusions starters tips on how to write a great body paragraph for a essay persuasive essay matters about healthcare. Write an essay on the songs in as you like it essay on zoo for class 1 in english, kidnapping essay introduction. Essay about examine and distinction between two cities. Easy essay on significance of reading books. The conclusion paragraph in an expository essay, the conclusion paragraph in an expository essay. Example of argumentative essay structure tips on how to structure a 10 mark sociology essay essay about japan meals diversity nation Essay on and define variety essay, pollution essay simple language essay on dr abdus salam Essay variety and on nation. Bible crucial pondering questionsfeatures of a great essay pdf. Short essay on my favourite recreation badminton in hindi, georgia southern sat essay argumentative an During essay ought to the section for writer revisionessay about place i have visited, essay on importance of smile in hindi. Essay on scarcity of jobvery quick essay on patriotismwhat are school application essays. Research paper on wind energyessay on improvement of administration islamic artwork essay question. Critical pondering testing cat lovers essay. Icsa case research previous exam papersessay on social development throughout early childhood three greenback essay reviewessay on satellite in hindi essay on amusement park for class 5. Sat apply essay exampleenglish essay position of newspaperessay on eid ul azha in urdu for sophistication 8my favorite recreation essay in english class 2 narrative essay romance. What type of writing is a evaluate and contrast essay starters for a narrative essay. Trees our greatest good friend essay in english for 8th standard, is there an essay for usf software capital punishment argumentative essay introduction. Essay on road rage in one hundred fifty words a pattern of a descriptive essay about my mom. Essay on second world struggle, advantages and disadvantages essay sample ielts bystander impact argumentative essay, unity in variety essay in one hundred fifty words. Good ways to start out a conclusion in an essay. Healthy food vs junk meals essay for sophistication three instance essays aqa biology, short essay about how to protect the setting, problems that college students encounter with essay writing. Effects of leisure essay topic for classification essay. Essay on dr abdus salam essay websites free of charge essays in english essay writing providers low-cost. Gre rating 6 essay sample essay on wet season in kannada distinction between legislation evaluate article and essay. College essay assist reddit, essay on pak china financial hall essay about my schooling background. Essay on subject india in hindi, essay deeper meaning, e-book exhibition essay in english how do you write a discursive essay good argumentative essay topics about animals, improve essay word rely instance of essay about storm yolanda. How to mla cite an essay in a book good words to finish an essay. Globalisation has each benefits and disadvantages ielts essay. Natural disasters essay 400 phrases, characteristics of a good essay pdf, pattern 5 paragraph essay for ged what's the greatest definition of a persuasive essay write an essay on liberty. What is a reflective essay definition. Writing a examine-and-distinction essay about presentation of ideas pre-writing lively. Essay on agriculture is the spine of our country essay on a marriage in my family, essay on vanam in sanskrit.

[drpompado]

You can do a lot of things; but you will never do nothing unless you’re working for what you dream, and to make it an reality. -Raymond Martha. This is short paragraph of my six minute performance show in which I was really pleased to perform this poem about ethnicity desprivileges of being black. And I have to say; it was really relieving andrelieving and the revealing the response of the public with this poem. I feel like I’m making changes by talking about it and surpassing the awkward and uncomfortable feeling it brings with it. I feel like I Martin Luther King Junior right now because I have a dream and now I’m working towards to make it a reality. #poetrycommunity #dutchperformance #ethnichair #beingblack #blackpowermovement #shoutout #poetsofinstagram #poeticjustice #spokenword #artist #princeofwillemstad (at Café De Kroeg)

[fyp-psychology]

12 Essential Communication Skills That Aren't Taught in Schools at All

“I’ve never let my schooling interfere with my education.” — Mark Twain

We’re taught the basics of communication early in the classroom. To be able to read, write, and speak effectively, we had to learn vocabulary, grammar, spelling, handwriting, and pronunciation. They were, however, focused on the rudimentary goal of imparting or exchanging information.

Communication goes much further than the academics of the written or spoken word. 

The purpose of communication is to build and grow connections with others at an emotional level. This is where classroom learning stops short and life learning kicks in. For many people, this transition can be rather jarring.

The earlier you master communication skills, the better for you — and those around you. Here is the cheat-sheet to the 12 essential communication skills your school missed:

Showing empathy

Theodore Roosevelt said, “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” Empathy makes us human. We stop being a twitter handle, a job title, or a faceless stranger when we can relate to the emotions of someone else. You connect with others much better when you show empathy in your communication.

How-to:

Be present with the person and feel what he feels. When someone opens up with his problems, see it from his point of view. Suspend your own judgment of what’s right or wrong. Listen to his emotions. Reflect back his vulnerability by sharing yours. Ask questions to go deeper into his world. Give encouragement. Offer to help if possible. Show the kindness and compassion you would hope to receive from someone else when in a similar situation.

Resolving conflict

This is the bomb disposal equivalent of communication skills. Left unchecked, conflict can leave relationships constantly tumultuous. Avoiding conflict altogether isn’t a solution either, as you’ll often be simmering with restrained frustration and resentment. Conflict often happens as a result of poor communication. To resolve such conflict, you’d need better communication skills.

How-to:

Respond, but never react. When you react to a conflict situation, you allow emotions to lead your words and actions. Responding to the situation means you keep emotions in check and focus on the problem, not the person. Let the other party know your intention to work out a mutually acceptable solution. Very often, the gesture of extending an olive branch is more important than actually coming to a solution, as it shows the person how much you value the relationship. Clearly and calmly communicate what you want from the situation and listen to the other party’s views. Understand what counts as a ‘win’ — winning the argument or winning the other person over. The two are very different.

Asking great questions

To be a better communicator, don’t try to be the person with all the right answers. Instead, be the one who asks all the right questions. When you ask great questions, you show that you’re eager to engage and open to exploring more into the topic. They encourage the other party to share more of his opinions, stimulate discussion, and even create new ideas. He won’t forget you in a hurry.

How-to:

Ask questions that could lead to interesting answers. To do that, keep your questions open-ended, that is, they cannot be answered with a simple “yes” or “no”. Let your questions come from a place of genuine curiosity. Consider how others can benefit from the answers. When you practice good listening skills, thoughtful questions will suggest themselves to you.

Negotiating effectively

Many people find negotiation one of the hardest communication skills to learn. They must be nice people. This one of the few communication skills that is mostly used to maximize self-interest. While there’s no avoiding it in life and work, to enter into a negotiation without negotiation skills is to go into a gunfight without a gun.

How-to:

Be assertive. Have options. Seek a win-win outcome. Recognize that if the other party wishes to negotiate, you have something they need. Be assertive in asking for what you want, aiming as high as you think is realistic for them. Listen to what they are saying (and not saying). Gather clues to how much they need what you have. Always have ready options should the negotiation fails — the other party can always sense your confidence or desperation. Show them how you’re looking for a win-win outcome by satisfying their basic interests too. If the deal goes through, it’s wiser to leave a bit of money on the table to enjoy a mutually beneficial relationship in the long run.

Proactive listening

This is the most underrated skill that can instantly make you a better communicator. Ever notice that when someone is a good talker, there’s something disingenuous or untrustworthy about him? But when a person is a good listener, we see her as someone who is patient, trusted, and generous.

When a person speaks, he believes he has something of value to share and wants to be heard. If he is not listened to, his self-esteem takes a hit. By listening to him intently, you immediately build a bond by validating his importance as a person or professional.

How-to:

Listen to the other party like she’s the most important person in the world at that moment. Be fully engaged and present with her. Block off all judgment of what she says or what that says about her. Keep your mind from thinking of what you’re going to say. Listen to not just her words, but also her emotions. The tone of voice, pace of speech, and shift in energy can tell you much more about her. This makes it easier for you to respond in the most appropriate way.

Using body language

You should know that almost 97% of all communication is non-verbal. It’s not about what you say, but the overall experience people take away from their encounter with you. The message you send out without even saying a word is the impression others have of you. As humans, we are conditioned to observe people and make snap decisions if a person is a friend, foe, or lover.

How-to:

Work on the three basics of good body language: the smile, eye contact, and the handshake. Smile at someone from the heart when you meet them. Look the person in the eye when you speak to them, or when they speak to you. Combine smiling and eye contact with a good, firm handshake. Always keep your body relaxed and posture confident. Observe the body language of others to gather important information. Is he engaged? Impatient? Defensive? You can tailor your response for a the outcome you want.

Perfecting the elevator pitch

In an attention-deficit world, it is imperative to be concise yet memorable in our communication. The elevator pitch is a very short presentation of yourself or your proposal to someone who has no more than 30 seconds. Whether you’re presenting a business idea or at a speed dating session, this is one communication skill that will set you apart from the pack. Want to know more? Read on. (See how this paragraph is a demonstration of an elevator pitch?)

How-to:

Distill what your proposition in one sentence. It’s not always easy, but put in the work to come up with something simple and memorable. For example, Apple in a sentence could be “Technology that’s beautiful and intuitive.” Lord Of The Rings is “Loyal friends help hobbit become the unlikely hero to save Middle-Earth.” Give the person a reason to care. Show him how your proposal can benefit him in a way nothing else can. Then end with a clear call-to-action — this is what you want him to do after your pitch. Remember, be confident. You have a good proposal and you know it. When you’re confident, they will know it too.

Inspiring others with an idea

An idea is one of the most powerful and contagious elements of any communication. Having an idea with someone can create a common bond built on the power of shared imagination.

How-to:

Share a unique thought that can energize others, and hold it lightly. Everyone has ideas, but the ones worth sharing are those that are refreshing and inspiring. When you have one of these gems, don’t make the mistake of keeping it too close to your chest. Share it with others, be open suggestions to improve or interpret it. Asking for input to reshape the idea together builds a trust that can go a long way.

Acknowledging others

Acknowledging someone is the act of letting the person know something great about him or her. It is different from complimenting or flattering. The difference lies in the intent. You’re not trying to benefit from the gesture, but to sincerely shine a spotlight on others. They will feel the difference.

How-to:

Look for the good in someone, and tell her how great it is. When we compliment someone, we can be indirectly flattering ourselves. When you say, “I really like your report”, is it about her report, or is it about you and your approval of her report? Try saying, “Nice report, you have some great insights” Now it’s all about her, not you. You can also acknowledge something in a person that few people would even notice, like how an assistant’s handouts are always perfectly stapled because she takes pride in being meticulous. The best communication lies in its subtlety.

Confident public speaking

Public speaking is one of the biggest all-time fears people have. Yet with its ability to influence and inspire many individuals at once, it’s one of the most powerful forms of communication. Think of the best orators in history — Winston Churchill, Martin Luther King, or Steve Jobs — they communicate simply and persuasively, making us feel better off after listening to them. Be it a work presentation or a charity drive, you will be put in situations where you have to speak to a group.

How-to:

Think of the one person in the audience who needs to hear your message. As with most communication skills and strategies, focus on the recipient of your message. Believe you have something important to share, and someone in the crowd will benefit from it. Don’t aim to be perfect in your delivery, aim to be passionate about your message. When you’re speaking from a place of authenticity and vulnerability, people will listen to you and root for you. Keep practicing.

Projecting leadership

The best leaders are masters of the craft of communication. How do you think they become leaders? We only follow those we trust. It helps that they are competent as well. Guess what, being a strong communicator does wonders on both counts.

How-to:

Aim to be a leader who serves his followers. Leaders have a separate manual for communication. This would include speaking clearly and confidently, acting with authenticity, listening to feedback, and many other skills. Underpinning these is a genuine intent to put his followers first, serving their interests above his own. Communication rooted in servant leadership not only makes a leader more empathetic, it makes followers more loyal. This deepens their relationship beyond one that’s based on rank and seniority.

Building authenticity and trust

While there are many best practices in communication, here is one rule above all: be true to yourself. People will only trust you if they feel you’re a real person who stands for something worthwhile. Without trust, there can be no quality communication and connection.

How-to:

Keep it real. Never try to be someone you’re not. Don’t “fake it” if you haven’t made it, work on getting better until “it” becomes you. You’ll earn people’s respect that way. Be honest with your shortcomings, share inspiring personal experiences, hold yourself accountable to your words, and speak with conviction. Communicating with others will come naturally to you.

[THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN BY LIFEHACK]

[sharknotes]

Hey guys! Here’s some advice for writing that rhetorical analysis essay on the ap lang/comp exam in a few weeks:

intro paragraph: 

This should only be 3-4 sentences long. Don’t spend too much time on it! Make sure you cover the SOAPS. 

This is how I like to do it:

speaker, occasion, subject (1 sentence)

purpose (1 sentence)

audience (1 sentence)

thesis (1 sentence)

Your thesis should tell what you’re proving about the effects of the author’s techniques-- it shouldn’t straight up list the techniques you’re discussing! Also, your thesis will ideally be a complex-compound sentence, which means it will have at least one dependent clause and two independent clauses. That makes your writing more sophisticated! 

Here’s an example thesis (that I wrote for an analysis of a single paragraph):

���As Martin Luther King Jr.’s ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ addresses the criticism of his actions and defends his methods, his twenty-third paragraph declares his complaints against the intransigence of the white moderate, defining the white moderate’s innate complacency as the single greatest obstacle in the Negro pursuit towards freedom.”

body paragraph:

There should be 2-4 body paragraphs, depending on the length of the passage. Remember: go with the flow of the text, and don’t force yourself to write exactly 3 body paragraphs. 

The paragraphs should be organized chronologically through the text, not by technique! This means sectioning the text by paragraph (1, 2, 3) or breaking it into parts (beginning/ middle/ end), depending on the format of the passage. 

My body paragraphs generally follow this structure:

topic sentence- briefly describe what the paragraph is about. use transition words to identify the segment of the text you’re talking about 

2-3 CSAs (basically examples)

claim: your position on the use of a rhetorical strategy

support: the quote, summary, or paraphrase of the text

analysis: explain how the strategy enhances the meaning and purpose of the text

synthesis to tie together the examples and state how they work together

closing sentence

Limit yourself to 2 strategies per paragraph to keep your essay focused. When writing under time constraints, I tend to be able to provide 2 examples of one strategy and 1 example of a second strategy, per paragraph, but that’s not a hard and fast rule.

conclusion paragraph:

Make this short and relevant. You’ll still have one more essay to go after this!

restate your thesis using different wording (1 sentence)

call to action, reflection, or extension (2-3 sentences)- it can be any of the following:

ask readers to evaluate the message of the piece

ask readers to agree with writer’s purpose

ask readers to examine how message is pertinent in modern-day

ask readers to reflect on the appropriateness of the piece in modern-day

another closing idea

[primeetime]

Why Don’t I Write More

It’s been too long since my last post. A lot has changed in my life, but at my core, I’m still the same. I want to be a great writer so I read. Some days I read a lot. Some days I read a little. But every day I read. If I can find one good quote, one good metaphor, one good simile or just one way to improve my writing, whatever I was reading was worth my time. Eventually I’ll write more, but for right now I focus on reading. 

So what I’m I reading right now. Well, next to me on my bed I have 3 books. I have Ta-Nehisi Coates powerful new book “The Water Dancer,” Leo Tolstoy’s epic masterpiece “War and Peace,” and I have Frederick Douglass’ 3rd autobiography, “The Life and Times of Frederick Dougalss.”

It’ll be a long time before I really commit to writing because I feel like so much of writing is based on reading other writers and slowly but surely coming up with your own style.

There are so many writers that I want to read and break down and analyze that I just know that right now writing is on the back burner. I want to read Zora Neale Hurston and W.E.B. DuBois. I want to read Colson Whitehead and Imani Perry. I want to read Langston Hughe’s short stories and August Wilson’s plays. I’ve already read the vast majority of James Baldwin’s non-fiction but I want to read his novels. And that’s only talking about the Black writers. 

From the 200 pages I’ve read of “War and Peace” I want to read, at the very least, Anna Karenina and Crime Punishment. I also want to read Oscar Wilde and some other British authors. Lastly, I definitely want to read the great American writers, so as you can see I have no shortage of authors to read. But in the meantime Ill write here and there. I might make a couple more posts in the next coming days because there are a couple burning issues that I want to write about. 

I don’t know if I’ll ever get around to it (heck, I don’t even know if anyone reads this lol), but the two topics I want to write about are the different forms that love can take (as Americans our understanding of love is so limited but I read this paragraph from the NYTimes Modern Love section and it inspired me to write something...“I flunked Chem II, which was especially humiliating for the daughter of a renowned scientist. “I’m not worried about your grade,” my teacher said, smiling. “I know that someday I’m going to have your books on my shelf.” I was stunned by his gift of faith. I felt as if I were flunking life, but he had seen my writing in the school paper. Twenty years later, I sent him a copy of my first published book. “I used your book in my retirement talk,” he wrote back. “Then I went home and put it on my shelf.””) and patriotism. 

I’ll leave you with a quote from James Baldwin and a powerful video that every American should watch. The quote is from “No Name in the Street” and it’s probably the most despairing line I’ve ever read from James, 

“I don’t think that any black person can speak of Malcolm and Martin without wishing that they were here. It is not possible for me to speak of them without a sense of loss and grief and rage; and with the sense, furthermore, of having been forced to undergo an unforgivable indignity, both personal and vast. Our children need them, which is, indeed, the reason that they are not here: and now we, the blacks, must make certain that our children never forget them. For the American republic has always done everything in its power to destroy our children’s heroes, with the clear (and sometimes clearly stated) intention of destroying our children’s hope. This endeavor has doomed the American nation: mark my words.”

The video I leave you with is of MLK’s funeral. I decided to watch it after reading Baldwin’s description of both the service. This post is getting longer than I expected, but I also want to add in James Baldwin’s description of the funeral service.

The church was packed, of course, incredibly so. Far in the front, I saw Harry Belafonte sitting next to Coretta King. I had interviewed Coretta years ago, when I was doing a profile on her husband. We had got on very well; she had a nice, free laugh. Ralph David Abernathy sat in the pulpit. I remembered him from years ago, sitting in his shirtsleeves in the house in Montgomery, big, black, and cheerful, pouring some cool soft drink, and, later, getting me settled in a nearby hotel. In the pew directly before me sat Marlon Brando, Sammy Davis, Eartha Kitt—covered in black, looking like a lost ten-year-old girl—and Sidney Poitier, in the same pew, or nearby. Marlon saw me and nodded. 

The atmosphere was black, with a tension indescribable—as though something, perhaps the heavens, perhaps the earth, might crack. Everyone sat very still. The actual service sort of washed over me, in waves. It wasn’t that it seemed unreal; it was the most real church service I’ve ever sat through in my life, or ever hope to sit through; but I have a childhood hangover thing about not weeping in public, and I was concentrating on holding myself together. I did not want to weep for Martin; tears seemed futile. But I may also have been afraid, and I could not have been the only one, that if I began to weep, I would not be able to stop. There was more than enough to weep for, if one was to weep—so many of us, cut down, so soon. Medgar, Malcolm, Martin: and their widows, and their children. 

Reverend Ralph David Abernathy asked a certain sister to sing a song which Martin had loved—“once more,” said Ralph David, “for Martin and for me,” and he sat down. The long, dark sister, whose name I do not remember, rose, very beautiful in her robes, and in her covered grief, and began to sing. It was a song I knew: “My Heavenly Father Watches Over Me.” The song rang out as it might have over dark fields, long ago; she was singing of a covenant a people had made, long ago, with life, and with that larger life which ends in revelation and which moves in love.

She stood there, and she sang it. How she bore it, I do not know; I think I have never seen a face quite like that face that afternoon. She was singing it for Martin, and for us. 

And surely, He Remembers me. My heavenly Father watches over me. 

At last, we were standing, and filing out, to walk behind Martin, home. I found myself between Marlon and Sammy. I had not been aware of the people when I had been pressing past them to get to the church. But, now, as we came out, and I looked up the road, I saw them. They were all along the road, on either side, they were on all the roofs, on either side. Every inch of ground, as far as the eye could see, was black with black people, and they stood in silence. It was the silence that undid me. I started to cry, and I stumbled, and Sammy grabbed my arm. We started to walk.

Baldwin, James. No Name in the Street (Vintage International) (pp. 156-157). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?443156-1/martin-luther-king-jr-funeral-coverage-1968

For me, the most moving part was the march. All the despairing Black faces that lined the street from Ebenezer Baptist Church to Morehouse College was just haunting. The assassination of Dr. King is probably the most devastating event in the history of Black America. Yes Dr. King was just a man, but for many African-Americans he had come to be the physical manifestation of hope. When he died, for African-Americans, hope died and we’ve been trying to recover ever since. 

[fundforteachers]

Hawaiians today celebrate the state’s admission as America’s 50th state. Or do they? Dan Clapero (Eagle Ridge Academy - Minnetonka, MN) dedicated his Fund for Teachers fellowship to exploring and documenting historic Hawaiian sites related to immigration, labor, trade,imperialism and religion to enhance curriculum and student understanding of Asian American and Hawaiian history. Here’s what he found...

How we as teachers on the mainland educate our students about Hawaii matters, because the stereotypes of an island paradise geared towards tourism is still alive and well today. Hawaiian history is often taught in a few isolated chunks within mainstream American history. Hawaiian history is more than a short paragraph in a textbook about American imperialism before the Spanish American War or Pearl Harbor and the entry of America into World War II.

Before any of that, Hawaii was an independent country that served as the crossroads of the United States and Asia. The Kingdom of Hawaii had treaties and major economic interactions with countries around the world during the 1800s. As teachers, we can do the following to strengthen our American history curriculum and also improve our students’ understanding of the uniqueness of Hawaii:

Geography: Have students map all eight of the Hawaiian Islands, instead of just labeling all of the islands as Hawaii. Each island has a unique history and they were not united as one nation until the early 1800s.

Native Americans: When teaching about Native Americans, make sure to include the Polynesians, who settled large areas of the Pacific which today include Hawaii and many other islands in the Pacific that are part of the United States. Evidence is also growing that the Polynesians may have had contact with people in South America several hundred years before European contact in the late 1400s and early 1500s.

Hawaiian Leaders: The Kingdom of Hawaii had many interesting leaders from Kamehameha to Queen Liliuokalani.  While Kamehameha might be seen as a great leader to many people on the island of Hawaii, the people of Kauai or Maui might have a very different opinion. Queen Liliuokalani’s interactions with the United States, when examined, will clearly show how the United States illegally occupied Hawaii and how hard she worked to save the Hawaiian nation.

Religion: When studying Native Americans, take time to study the kapu system; which has clear differences when compared to many Native American Nations within the United States.

Industrialization/Immigration: One of biggest takeaways from my fellowship was how quickly Hawaii became an industrialized nation. Iolani Palace had electricity and telephone service before the White House. The leadership of Hawaii was very active in making Hawaii an industrial nation and shaping immigration policy. We as teachers should not teach that America just took over Hawaii, as it discredits the people and leadership of Hawaii.  The assimilation of Hawaii was gradual and the Hawaiian leadership was under constant pressure from foreign leaders and powerful foreign businesses to change their laws. The uniqueness of Hawaii was shaped by its immigration policies during the mid to late 1800s. The city of Lahaina, Hawaii became one of the biggest whaling ports for Americans by the 1840s. Whaling also strongly connected New England to Hawaii, which can still be seen in some of the older houses and mission sites.  

Imperialism: The illegal takeover of Hawaii by America needs to be studied and primary sources from Queen Liliuokalani are a perfect place to start. Hawaii also survived attempts by Russia, France and Great Britain to gain influence.  Kamehameha’s trade with Europeans and Americans gave him the weapons and technology he needed to gain control over all of the Islands. In many ways, modern Hawaii has been shaped by imperialistic influences since the 1790s.  

Civil Rights: The Civil Rights movement should also include Hawaii. During the historically-significant 1965 march from Selma to Montgomery, Martin Luther King, Jr. and his followers wore white leis from Hawaii, connecting back to one of Martin Luther King’s earlier visits. The Hawaiian sovereignty movement could also be connected with the Red Power Movement of the 1960s and 70s. Native Hawaiians are not recognized in the same way that most Native Americans on the mainland are.  The lack of sovereignty for the native people of Hawaii continues to be an issue that divides the state today.

Economics: My biggest takeaway from researching in Hawaii for two weeks was the deep concern over what some call tourism imperialism.  Airbnb enables individuals to rent their houses for extra income. One of the major problems with this is that many people who don’t even live in Hawaii rent out their houses to tourists making it very difficult for people who do live there to find affordable housing. Tourism is a major part of Hawaii’s economy, but jobs related to tourism usually do not pay high wages. Once again this impacts the local people, as the cost of living in Hawaii continues to rise. In many ways, the Hawaiians are being economically driven from their homeland. As teachers, we should let students explore the positives and negatives caused by new technologies/businesses like Airbnb, Uber and Lyft. Hawaii often foreshadows future problems the mainland of America might have because of its isolation.  

My fellowship to Hawaii allowed me to interact with many people who care about protecting the state’s history and want to share that history with the rest of world.  I am going to do my part as a teacher on the mainland to ensure that more of Hawaii’s history is connected to my American history curriculum and that students understand that Hawaii more is than an exotic tourism destination.

Dan loves teaching history, but also traveling across the United States gaining knowledge and gathering resources to bring into his classroom. A teacher for the last thirteen years, he has been nominated for Best First Year Teacher and Minnesota Social Studies Teacher of the Year; but his favorite awards are thank you letters received from former students.