formal paper2 draft3

Dear Liza,

In all the time I have known you, I’ve always thought of you as a second mother and you were the one with the more drastic views in life. You have always told your own children and I, that life should be free and that we need to find our own happiness because we live in a society where it is dangerous to be different. I have always taken to heart all the teachings that my parents, you and other important people in my life have imparted onto me, but at the same time as I grew up I learned to question these teachings and see if I believe them the same way and with the help of your son we decided that we didn’t think that all the teachings were right. We believe that society, as a whole would excel if we could get rid of the far extremes of liberal and conservative. From our reasoning if we got rid of the extremes, what we are then left with are: open-minded conservatives who can compromise or at least can understand the reasons for some kind of change, and liberals who have more pride in their nation and get the drive to want to create change in the ways that they need to be. I know I’m biased from the way I grew up and I’ll always tend to agree with liberals but I think society would be able to move forward if we stop bickering between two separate political powers fighting just because it makes them look good, instead of fighting for the people they represent.

The two sides on paper look like they keep each other in balance, but in reality all the political powers do is bicker and try to take the opponent down with slander and yellow journalism. The conservatives take the side of the individual, pumps them full of information that takes most of its leads from the bible. The liberals are all about the community and making it a better place for everyone rather than yourself.

Conservatives, stand of the side of the individual giving them more rights and if they’re the same as the mass population than all the more power to them. Many conservatives believe that gay marriage, abortion, and gun control should be illegal. I think that they come to these conclusions because they feel scared that someone is trying to take away something they hold dear such as specific laws or laws from their religion. They tend to make a bigger fit about whatever the issue is and that seems like it can be very effective because they make people see their side more and more, but the downfall of the conservative way of thinking is, they think in terms of personal gain and religion which makes they’re decisions to be extreme because all through out history when someone’s personal and/or religious views are challenged (even in a discussion setting), people tend to over-react and act defensively. “We support the traditional definition of “marriage” as the legal union of one man and one woman, and we believe that federal judges and bureaucrats should not force states to recognize other living arrangements as marriages. We do not believe sexual preference should be given special legal protection or standing in law” (Republican Platform adopted at GOP National Convention Aug 12, 2000). They seem to take the side of choosing to take away the rights of someone that doesn’t quite fit into the cookie cutter version of people that the conservative’s like to project to the general public.

On the complete other side the liberals, side with that of society. They try to make things better for all of society making everything better not just the betterment of a small group of people. “We support the right of all families to have equal respect, responsibilities, and protections under the law. We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples. We also support the freedom of churches and religious entities to decide how to administer marriage as a religious sacrament without government interference”(2012 Democratic Party Platform Sep 4, 2012). Unfortunately their fatal flaw is that they don’t make as big of a deal as the conservatives do because they don’t feel like their beliefs are being attacked thus making them not feel defensively and people who are being defensive are much more prone to lash out, attack, and fight because they feel like there is no way out of a situation without attacking.

We as humans want to fight; we want contests to see who is right or better, its evident in every society, even in animals. We want to outshine the others and be noticed as an alpha. For a better, more efficient society we need to stop the fighting (at least when it comes to important subjects like political gain and the economy), so we as a culture can compromise, agree and get on with other issues instead of fighting and attacking because a view on something is different.

Liza, I thought of you when I started thinking of this and how it could help you in the future. In my mind we can achieve this by talking to the people around us and spread the knowledge of what could be in society, instead of all of this fighting.

With good intentions,

Eli Sierra-Trustman

Works Cited

"Democratic Party in 2012 Democratic Party Platform." 2012 Democratic Party Platform Adopted by Democratic National Convention. N.p., 8 Sept. 2012. Web. 26 May 2013.

"Republican Party in 2000 Republican Party Platform." 2000 Republican Party Platform. N.p., 29 Sept. 2012. Web. 26 May 2013.

formal paper2 draft2

Dear Liza,

In all the time I have known you, I’ve always thought of you as a second mother and you were the one with the more drastic views in life. You have always told your own children and I, that life should be free and that we need to find our own happiness because we live in a society where it is dangerous to be different. I have always taken to heart all the teachings that my parents, you and other important people in my life have imparted onto me, but at the same time as I grew up I learned to question these teachings and see if I believe them the same way and with the help of your son we decided that we didn’t think that all the teachings were right. We believe that society, as a whole would excel if we could get rid of the far extremes of liberal and conservative. From our reasoning if we got rid of the extremes, what we are then left with are: open-minded conservatives who can compromise or at least can understand the reasons for some kind of change, and liberals who have more pride in their nation and get the drive to want to create change in the ways that they need to be. I know I’m biased from the way I grew up and I’ll always tend to agree with liberals but I think society would be able to move forward if we stop bickering between two separate political powers fighting just because it makes them look good, instead of fighting for the people they represent.

The two sides on paper look like they keep each other in balance, but in reality all the political powers do is bicker and try to take the opponent down with slander and yellow journalism. The conservatives take the side of the individual, pumps them full of information that takes most of its leads from the bible. The liberals are all about the community and making it a better place for everyone rather than yourself.

Conservatives, stand of the side of the individual giving them more rights and if they’re the same as the mass population than all the more power to them. Many conservatives believe that gay marriage, abortion, and gun control should be illegal. I think that they come to these conclusions because they feel scared that someone is trying to take away something they hold dear such as specific laws or laws from their religion. They tend to make a bigger fit about whatever the issue is and that seems like it can be very effective because they make people see their side more and more, but the downfall of the conservative way of thinking is, they think in terms of personal gain and religion which makes they’re decisions to be extreme because all through out history when someone’s personal and/or religious views are challenged (even in a discussion setting), people tend to over-react and act defensively.

We as humans want to fight; we want contests to see who is right or better, its evident in every society, even in animals. We want to outshine the others and be noticed as an alpha. For a better, more efficient society we need to stop the fighting (at least when it comes to important subjects like political gain and the economy), so we as a culture can compromise, agree and get on with other issues instead of fighting and attacking because a view on something is different.

formal paper 2 draft1

Dear Liza,

In all the time I have known you, I’ve always thought of you as a second mother and you were the one with the more drastic views in life. You have always told your own children and I, that life should be free and that we need to find our own happiness because we live in a society where it is dangerous to be different. I have always taken to heart all the teachings that my parents, you and other important people in my life have imparted onto me, but at the same time as I grew up I learned to question these teachings and see if I believe them the same way and with the help of your son we decided that we didn’t think that all the teachings were right. We believe that society, as a whole would excel if we could get rid of the far extremes of liberal and conservative. From my reasoning if we got rid of the extremes, we are then left with open-minded conservatives who can compromise or at least can understand the reasons for some kind of change, and liberals who have more pride in their nation and get the drive to want to create change in the ways that they need to be. I know I’m biased from the way I grew up and I’ll always tend to agree with liberals but I think society would be able to move forward if we stop bickering between two separate political powers fighting just because it makes them look good, instead of fighting for the people they represent. 

RA: Killer Culture

The article Killer Culture written by David Kupelian shows us the changes in life and culture from the 1950’s to now. Kupelian states that we are losing our morals and that we are a society comparable to the biblical “Sodom & Gomorrah”, following our passions and feelings to feel free. Our freedom allows us to express ourselves even if it doesn’t quite fit in with the ideas of what a man or woman is to the older generation. Men growing their hair long, wearing jewelry, or just being gay. Women doing “Man’s work”, being independent, being able to think for herself, and not just conforming to being a being of less importance than their husbands. Kupelian not only agrees with what was the normal life style of the 1950’s but also states that he believes that we should go back to that way of thinking making life distinctly black and white with no gray middle ground, by creating a subculture that, celebrates the distinct gender and color roles in society.

            Kupelian show us that we as a culture are destroying our morals by following our lowest primal pleasures. We want to be entertained, we want our own identity to distinguish ourselves from others, and we want the new. We want to be able to do whatever we want and to do it whenever we want. We as a culture would be perfectly happy to do nothing and follow the fleeting feeling of pleasure. I agree that we are following our primal instincts to find pleasure but I don’t think we are destroying our morals we are trying to abide by whatever schema is set in front of us, and we follow it to fit in. In Kupelian’s case his schema doesn’t match what his schema, which allows him to think that what we are doing is wrong or unmoral.

            We all have this kind of feeling that someone else’s schema is wrong and we feel that because the schemas of our lives are drastically different from someone else’s. Most of Americans have at one point or another thought to them that the Middle East is so oppressive and malicious for whatever they are doing, but they would say the same thing about us because of the different schemas. Kupelian may think that we are unmoral and that our culture should change back to the schemas of the 1950’s but I think that as a culture we are doing just fine.

RR: Under the Sign of Mickey Mouse & Co.

1. Gatlin identifies that the qualities, values, and attitudes that shape American society is that we are trying to reach a feeling of: Freedom, wealth, comfort, innocence, power, and the state of mind of a youth. It’s a good list but I would add ruthlessness because in our society we are ready to backstab anyone as long as it helps ourselves.
2. Gatlin tells us that the American way of life is taking over the identities of cultures that maybe smaller or different from itself. It does this by bombarding every part of your life with little hints to whatever the American’s are liking, doing, acting, appreciating, or obsessing over. What are lost though are our heritage and our pride as a culture.
3. Gatlin suggests that American culture is spongy and promiscuous because we take different parts of other cultures, combine and fuse them, and then add it to the rest of the hodgepodge of traditions, fads, and lifestyles we call the American culture. We are also a bottom-up society because we control our representatives not the other way around.
4. The English language (American English) is most simplified of the common languages and is mostly used for business because of it. It’s a common language because of how much it is used in business. When a culture needs business they use this language and therefore have to teach it in schools and when its taught students want to have some kind of self identity so they go for some new culture than the one they grew up in and then the American culture gets integrated into the other culture though the shear force of how many people identify with it.
5. My interpretation of what Gatlin thought of American culture and what it’s doing to the rest of the world is that the American culture as a whole is a drug for the rest of the world. Gatlin talks about how sad it is that American culture is corrupting isolated tribes of people, and that we are for pleasure. Our top export is entertainment and it corrupts the other cultures because we look like we’re having fun or being free.
6. I think that very traditional cultures would reject American culture openly and still have some who are part of it solely out of rebellion and pressure.
7. I would think that Kupelian would agree with Gatlins idea that we are destroying traditional cultures but I think that Kupelian would want to change the other cultures but to his ideal American society of the 1950’s.
8. In our popular culture we have a very eclectic taste in music, because we have so many different cultures that we integrate (d) in our culture, which makes defining what “American style” is. The genre of music that can be the closest to being called “American style”, what we so aptly call “pop music”. It ranges from any kind of music so the changes and fusions are infinite. The ever-changing styles of “pop music” is perfect for allowing any kind of music into itself the same way “American culture” does with other culture.

RR: Killer Culture

RR: Killer Culture

While reading the article Killer Culture by David Kupelian all I felt was anger and frustration. My entire childhood my parents and other important figures in my life have all raised me to believe that everyone is beautiful and that you should be able to express yourself in any way you want. Kupelian however believes that society should follow the 1950’s ideal of the manly man and women can vote but not think.

Kupelian comes from a generation where White Judeo-Christian males ruled, and by being one misses the power that it would entitle him to. In the 1950’s white men ruled but everyone else was prosecuted and shunned. Women in general in the 19950’s were depressed because they had no say in their life and that the unmarried women in that society were actually happier, because they had what control they could get. “On the growing number of women that were getting regular psychiatric help, the married ones were reported unhappy and unsatisfied, the unmarried ones were suffering from anxiety and depression”(Pg. 32 Lamb). As women decided that they were over being less than, they changed and allowed much more freedom of who you are and what you could be.

Be who you are, do what you feel is right and express yourself in any way you feel is right. This is what every important figure in my life has told me. I believe this with my whole being. When Kupelian compared our society to the biblical cities of sin Sodom and Gomorrah. “Drunken men with multiple piercings and bright red robes, one loose woman under each arm, cavorting in orgastic revelry against a background of annoying, mosquito-like music?”(pg. 55 Kupelian). I wasn’t quite sure whither to laugh or to get angry. The notion that we are “sinners” is that we are not following the exact ideals of a past generation. Kupelian also states that to go back to his ideal society we would have to start a subculture. He is completely right that to go back he would have to start a subculture. My reaction to this was that he wants to take away freedoms and make being who you are a bad thing and this really made me think he was trying to create another neo-Nazi, skinhead culture.

Kupelian may think we are headed down a bad road and that we should head back and stay at the spot where his people were in charge, but I think that we are headed in a better direction by letting people express themselves and can think for ourselves to make informed decisions about what ever we want.

Works Cited

Kupelian, David. "Killer Culture." Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. By Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle. Boston: Bedford of St. Martin's, 1992. N. pag. Print.

Lamb, Venessa Martins. "The 1950’s and 1960’s and the American Woman: The Transition from the “housewife” to the Feminist." Dumas (2011): n. pag. Dumas. Web. 4 May 2013. <http://dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/docs/00/68/08/21/PDF/V_Martins_Lamb_-_Civi_2011.pdf>.