The Grade I Deserve

As the picture illustrates, I feel I deserve a high grade. Maybe not an A+, since no one is perfect, but I feel I've earned an A. Over the course of the semester, I've completed all of my assignments early, and I never missed one. I even did a couple extra ones, and I commented on other people's blogs when I found their topics interesting. I especially liked reading Sarah's blog.

I feel that I put effort and thought into all of the blogs that I've posted, and they are well written. All of them have to be close to error free grammatically because I edit my work carefully (I judge people by their

writing). I utilized hyperlinks and pictures in almost all of my blogs to give the reader something to look at besides columns upon columns of words, and my pictures all fit nicely; they aren't overwhelming and excessive. Also, when I used videos, they were relevant, used sparingly, and formatted to fit the constraints of my blog. And of course I came to class regularly, which demonstrates I care about learning enough to not skip.

Besides, if I'm only 11 points away from it anyway, by that logic I'd have to do less than failing work. I don't even know how a person would come by that grade unless it's just points for putting one's name on the page and nothing else. I feel like I've exceeded all of the requirements necessary to be successful in this class, so to coincide with that, a high grade would complement my expectations.

Free Topic

I'm quite proud of my column that was in The George-Anne Thursday, so I'm putting it here as well. I received compliments. :)

And, to show that I'm doing this in the spirit of class, I'll add hyperlinks to it.

Freedom of speech should always trump controversy:

On Tuesday, Federal District Court Judge William Downes ruled that it was a First Amendment violation for the University of Wyoming to forbid Bill Ayers, co-founder of Weather Underground, a 1960s radical anti-war group, and current university professor, from speaking on campus.

The judge, who served as a Marine in Vietnam, issued his verdict – despite his contempt for Weather Underground – saying, “Mr. Ayers is a citizen of the United States who wishes to speak, and he need not offer any more justification than that.” He said that a free society must guarantee free speech rights, according to The Huffington Post.

Downes said the reasons the university provided were too vague to deny Ayers the right to speak – the university cited safety concerns as the reason.

Hm, that kind of sounds familiar.

Last March, Ayers was supposed to come speak at Georgia Southern, yet according to an article in the March 3, 2009 edition of The George-Anne, “[t]he event was cancelled last month following concerns from the university that included the security and expense that Ayers’ visit would have entailed.”

But Ayers came to GSU in November, at which time he said, “To say that the only reason I wasn’t invited was because of a safety concern is nonsense. I’m not afraid. I live openly at my house in Chicago.”

So, Ayers did not feel $13,000 in security was necessary, and the cancellation came after complaints from some of the GSU community and some of the Statesboro community. It becomes logical to assume, then, that despite said justification, it is more likely that the controversy created was more of an issue than anything else, and cancelling his visit was the response to succumbing to pressure.

That is a blatant violation of not only Ayers’ rights, but also a violation of the students’ rights who were deprived of an opportunity to hear him speak. A university should, more than almost any other institution, be a place where the free exchange of ideas, controversial or not, is encouraged.

If you don’t support/like Bill Ayers, fine. Don’t attend his presentation. Even protest it if you want, but respect the rights of others who want to hear him, and respect his right to speak. The First Amendment cannot be applied only when it’s convenient; it has to be applied across the board. This court case, one of many, has proven that just because the man is controversial does not mean that First Amendment rights both to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly can be violated.

If people are forbidden from speaking their mind or prevented from hearing opinions from all different sides, then there’s no way to grow. Just because you don’t agree with something doesn’t mean it can’t be said.

Therefore, I am of the opinion that Bill Ayers be invited back to GSU to speak in a venue that is not kept secret from the majority of the school. It is so important that students hear from many different kinds of people, so there’s no reason for the university to deny Ayers the opportunity.

And if there’s controversy again, at least there’s precedent favoring the First Amendment, what is supposed to be one of the core values of our nation.

Support can be shown by writing on the wall of the Facebook group “Sit-In for Academic Freedom at Georgia Southern University.”

Oh, and on a side note, his speech took place at the University of Wyoming without incident.

The Ethics of Breaking the Law

Law is in place to keep society from dissolving. In order to maintain a functioning society, individuals give up some of their free will, knowing that in return the governing are supposed to act fairly and justly.

But, as we all know, the latter half of the bargain is not always upheld to the approval of some. We wouldn't be a country if America's founding fathers sat back and accepted laws as Britain proclaimed them.

Therefore, of course there are situations in which it is ethical -- that is, morally correct -- to break the law. Nothing exists purely in black and white. That being said, it is not something that can happen all the time; the law has to be respected most of the time or society will slip into anarchy.

I would also like to clarify that law-breaking for change does not always have to be violent. I am not a supporter of violence under any circumstances because if everybody would just stop fighting to the death, I believe progress would find more success. It's not right, under any circumstances, to kill a person, for example, no matter what point the murderer is trying to get across. It violates the victim's right to live. There have been numerous court cases in which the Supreme Court declared a law unconstitutional, especially when it comes to free speech, and the only way to have that happen was to break said law, so it is possible.

Buddhist monks protest peacefully. So can you.

That being said, I admit that's not how it is for most of us. Realistically, it seems that today, violence is the only way to get attention. It's certainly the case with the media, where the quip is "If it bleeds, it leads." PBS discusses the ethical issues behind such a philosophy. So that people break the law violently for attention is understandable, but it's still not ethical. To elaborate strays off this specific topic, though, and into general media ethics.

The issue we discussed in class regarding the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is bordering on an unethical practice. Yes, they are acting for a good cause, if the number of incidental kills decreases. However, the fact that they haven't killed anyone yet with their chosen means of law-breaking (ramming their boat into fishermen's) is pure luck. It doesn't matter if their cause is to save fish and not humans, frankly. The lives of the fishermen are not suddenly expendable because of their practices, and this is coming from a vegetarian who does not believe it's right to kill animals for mass production. On the flip side, though, if people haven't been taking the SSCS to court because they know their actions are unethical, then they need to take responsibility and rectify those actions.

Ethics is undoubtedly a murky subject to delve into, seeing as there are so many different, personal interpretations of what is right and what is wrong. Really, all that I can say is for the most part, laws need to be respected; however, that does not mean things should be taken without question.

Twilight and Philosophy

Twilight and Philosophy: Vampires, Vegetarians, and the Pursuit of Immortality

Yes, this is a book. I included a picture. And a link to read it from Google books.

But before all of the "Ewww, Twilight!!" commences,  I would just like to say, "Stop; grow up; I don't want to hear it." Critique the series all you want; it is very angsty and dramatic, I know.

However, this book is not so much about the series as it is a philosophical look at the way vampires are portrayed in Stephanie Meyer's books, the roles religion and feminism play, and what it means to really be compassionate.

So far, at least. I haven't finished the book yet.

The way it's laid out, though, each part focuses on one book of the series and the philosophical issues that arise. For example, part one focuses on Twilight.

The issues discussed are:

• You Look Good Enough to Eat: Love, Madness, and the Food Analogy. This discusses the role food plays in pleasurable emotion, and how that relates to the fact that Edward, in essence, wants to express his desires by literally consuming Bella.
• Dying to Eat: The Vegetarian Ethics of Twilight: Is it ethical for a vampire to spare humans but still eat and kill animals? What makes it different? What are the different standards for humans and vampires regarding diet, and does it make one better than the other?
• Can a Vampire Be a Person?: Pretty self-explanatory; there is a differentiation between being human and a person, so it examines which, if any, a Twilight vampire is capable of being.
• Carlisle: More Compassionate Than a Speeding Bullet?: If you've read any the books or seen any of the movies, then you're aware that Carlisle is the one who promotes the "vegetarian" way of life among vampires, and is very caring towards those close to him. So this section looks at different definitions of compassion, and what it is that makes Carlisle's compassion a heightened capability.

All of these are written by different contributors, and they all draw comparisons to legitimate philosophers (Aristotle, Nietzsche, etc.) and philosophical concepts -- they have very informative footnotes -- so it is something worth reading if the reader wants to see how old thoughts are still relevant to pop culture today.

For those who are not interested in Twilight, there are others in the series that may be of interest: 

• X-Men and Philosophy: Astonishing Insight and Uncanny Argument in the Mutant X-Verse
• Family Guy and Philosophy: A Cure for the Petarded
• House and Philosophy: Everybody Lies

As well as ones for Watchmen, Batman, The Office, and more.

Why NOT?

The better question to ask when thinking about why to hire me is why would you not? I am a student who is already a junior in only my fourth semester of college. I am in the Honors Program with a 3.9 GPA, whose degree path includes a B.S. in journalism with political science and German minors. I am set to be the editor-in-chief of GSU's newspaper beginning this summer, a newspaper that is available to approximately 20,000 people.

I am committed to everything that I do and give it my all so that I may proud of it when I finish. I have a strong sense of internal motivation and do things because they should be done, not because I have to or because I'm told to. I'm friendly and sweet, so I get along with many different people, but at the same time, I will not let people walk all over me. I would do anything for those that I care about; I have a firm notion justice that I am constantly working to uphold. I have strong opinions that I love to voice, but I will listen to everyone else's too because I love to learn, and I am especially drawn to learning about people and how the individual operates.

That innate sense of curiosity combined with my desire for change and ability to apply what I learn is what is going to enable me to make a mark on the world. I express myself clearly and concisely -- I am a journalist after all. I know how to communicate effectively with various groups of people, whether they be professionals, peers, students or even children. While artists narrate with pictures, I illustrate with words. I want to call attention to issues that need it and present options to make life better for people everywhere.

I have the drive and ability to make a difference, just give me the chance to let me show you what I can do.

Favorite Superhero: Rogue

From a young age, I never really had a favorite superhero. I've been pretty feminist all my life, it seems, because it always made me so mad that Wonder Woman was really the only well known female superhero, and she wasn't anything worth looking up to. (Example A, above.) It's not very difficult to figure out why it is that she has such strong muscles around her mouth; it's obviously targeted towards male readers. But what kind of girl wants to look up to a woman like that? (Don't answer that, please, because I'd rather not know.)

Practically every female hero is objectified in the comic world, if not through personality, then through dress. And I really don't want to find a favorite superhero in a man who treats women in a misogynistic, outdated manner. (Example B, left.) Sure, the age of superheroes and villains may have reached its height before women started to assert themselves, but I fail to understand why there have not been any strong female role models created since. Even Sailor Moon characters are dressed in a way that appeals to men, despite the fact that many little girls had a favorite as well.

But I did find one female superhero for whom I have definitely developed an affinity: Rogue, of Marvel's X-Men. I adore her. I started watching X-Men: Evolution in middle school, and she was my favorite on that show, and from there I was very into the movies when they came out. Rogue, whose real name is Anna Marie, had such a strong personality and was kind of the outcast of the group, and I especially liked her style (i.e. her hair). Her power is also the best, in my opinion, because she can absorb any power by skin-to-skin contact or kill people if she continues and drains their life force -- ultimate power.

That's probably why she was originally recruited by the "bad guys" before becoming an X-Man. All her life, she's been conflicted because she doesn't want to hurt anyone with her powers and they prevent her from becoming close to anyone. She put the one boy she was ever close to in a permanent coma after impulsively kissing him. Mystique was able to transform the loneliness Rogue felt into anger and then convince her to join the Brotherhood of Mutants. But eventually, all of the memories and powers Rogue had absorbed became too much for her, and she had to seek help from the X-Men so that she could learn to control her powers, thereby becoming "good."

I think it's her tortured soul that I'm drawn to, and that's what makes her my favorite. That, and the fact that she can, in effect, do anything... that doesn't involve contact in affection. 

Seigniorage

I chose this topic because I couldn't pronounce the word, and so I was quite intrigued. So first off, for anyone else who may be curious, it is pronounced "sane-yur-ij".

Basically, it is the difference in what it costs to make a coin and what that coin is worth, face value.  If it costs 5 cents to make a quarter, then the seigniorage is 20 cents. When the money is worth more than it costs to produce, as it does in this example, the government profits. Of course, the government will lose money if the reverse occurs.

The way that it works with dollar bills is slightly different. Today, the Federal Reserve buys and sells treasury bonds from banks, and replaces those bonds with bills. But since there's interest to be collected from bonds, when the bills go out of circulation and the bonds are returned, the government will profit.

A great example of when the government profited from seigniorage is with the collector's series of state quarters. It only costs about 5 cents to make a quarter, so since people don't intend to spend these, the government profits when, for instance, they're purchased from TV for more than their face value of 25 cents.

The Roaring Twenties

The 1920s in America were a time of great prosperity that ultimately culminated in disaster for the entire nation. But in the early '20s, the U.S. was just coming out of WWI involvement, the success of which left Americans feeling quite proud, and the nation survived a worldwide flu epidemic. Needless to say, many people felt like nothing could bring them down.


Warren G. Harding was elected president in 1920, and he promoted a "return to normalcy": a resurgence of nativism, isolationism, and rejection of the progressive era's governmental activism. Despite that, after making the change from a wartime economy to a peacetime economy, America became the richest nation in the world and developed the consumer mentality with which we are familiar today. "People spent money for better roads, tourism, and holiday resorts. Real estate booms, most notably in Florida, sent land prices soaring." Also, Henry Ford introduced the Model T in this decade, and assembly line production developed in accordance with that.


Then, Black Tuesday: October 29, 1929. The stock market crashed, and the decade of excess and consumerism came to an abrupt halt.

This video sounds like it was made in the '20s, so it's a little scratchy.

"The Visit" Review

I went to go see The Visit on Friday night, and was not expecting it to be that great. If I want to see a play, I'm more into comedies or musicals... old-time drama just isn't my thing. Unfortunately, I have to say reality was pretty much equivalent with my expections. Nothing against the actors or the scenery construction or anything, the plot was just nothing interesting to me.

It started out in a town called Güllen, which I have to say no one pronounced correctly, given that it's a German town. Umlauts are there for a reason; I wish they'd be ommitted if they're just going to be ignored. But anyway, the town is very poor and the people are expecting the return of one of their former residents, Clara, who they hope will donate money to rejuvinate the town. She does in fact promise them $1 billion, but at a costly exchange. The reason Clara returned to the town was to rectify the injustice against her that forced her to leave in the first place, so the play becomes about whether the townspeople will accept monetary riches for what would typically be seen as a great moral transgression. In the end, Clara gets what she wants, as it seems like she's accustomed to, but I wish the play included how the townspeople lived with themselves. I applaud the message of the story, I just think it's time to modernize it -- like how La Bohème is the basis of Rent.

The acting wasn't bad; as far as I could tell, no one messed up his lines too badly. My biggest question and consequential pet peeve after watching this play is "How on earth does screaming 'Ahhhh!' and charging a man kill him?" Honestly, not well thought out, in my opinion. With all the other sound effects that were played throughout, a gun shot couldn't have been managed? He could've at least been charged by a crowd with knives, but I don't buy that he died of fright.

I would also like to point out that I found the amount of typos in the program to be abyssmal. The main character's name, Clara, was not even misspelled as "Claire." The program definitely said "Clarie." I am a firm proponent of the belief that a large amount of one's credibility is determined by grammatical correctness, especially when it comes to names. Overall, I don't think it was worth the $5 that I really needed for other things this week. I would not have minded had it been free, but I really did need that money.

Summer Vacation

I don't have much to anticipate this summer. I'm not graduating, I don't take summer courses, so for me, there isn't anything too difficult about my three-month break from school.

This summer, I am looking forward to two main things: moving into an apartment and going to Germany. Granted, the going to Germany part isn't certain yet, but I'm hopeful. I'm super excited about living in an apartment though, because it means getting the chance to redecorate my room. By no means am I anything close to having an eye for design, but it's fun for me nonetheless. It was always the high point of being a military child and moving often. Now, though, it includes things like getting my own silverware, and curtains, and minor furniture, and pots, and pans... I'm a nerd. Weird things make me happy. But I will spend a good couple weeks getting everything just right, because have I mentioned I have OCD tendencies as well? It's my main goal to keep everything neat and orderly over the summer; once school starts I just never have the time to maintain it.

The other high point of my summer will be going to Germany (if all goes well). My dad and I go every few years or so to visit his parents, and I love going because it's beautiful there and I get the opportunity to practice my German. I guess I kind of anticipate going this year for that reason... I've realized that my speaking skills are not up to par compared to my listening and reading abilities. We'll be staying in Bayern, which is one of my favorite areas because of the historic look.

Münich. How can you not think it's beautiful?

I want to be able to explore and walk around by myself this time though, since I'm actually old enough to be able to do so. This time, I will understand the importance of taking photographs while I'm there because I don't know when I'll have the next opportunity to go back. I will have loads of pictures, hopefully like this one. Then I will come back to my apartment and await another semester of school while working for the newspaper while I'm here.

Modern Europe: Fall of the Berlin Wall

The Berlin Wall was built during the Cold War as a literal barrier between communism and democracy. It started out as just a barbed wire fence when construction of the Berlin Wall began August 13, 1961 by the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). It was a "desperate" move to stop East Berliners from escaping from Soviet-controlled East Berlin to American-, French-, and British-occupied West Berlin. The wall was completed within a day, and it completely sealed off each side from the other.


The actual concrete wall was added in 1965, and it remained the barrier until 1975 when the ‘Stützwandelement UL 12.11’ was constructed, which is the version most people are familiar with.

"It was made from 45,000 separate sections of reinforced concrete, each 3.6 m high and 1.5 m wide, and topped with a smooth pipe, intended to make it more difficult for escapers to scale it. The Grenzmauer was reinforced by mesh fencing, signal fencing, anti-vehicle trenches, barbed wire, over 300 watchtowers, and thirty bunkers."

Escapes were common in the initial days of the wall, but after the concrete wall was constructed, the escapes had to get more creative, so people dug tunnels, among other things. East German guards were allowed to shoot those trying to escape, though. This is one of the more dire stories:

"August 17, 1962: In the early afternoon, two 18-year-old young men ran toward the Wall with the intention on scaling it. The first of the young men to reach the Wall successfully scaled it. The second one, Peter Fechter, was not so lucky. As he was about to scale the wall, a border guard opened fire. Peter continued to climb the Wall, but ran out of energy just as he reached the top. He then tumbled back onto the East German side of the Wall. To the shock of the world, Peter was just left there. The East German guards did not shoot him again nor did they go to his aid. Peter shouted in agony for nearly an hour. Once he had bled to death, East German guards carried off his body. He became the 50th person to die at the Berlin Wall and a symbol of the struggle for freedom."

The wall came down on November 9, 1989 when an East German official announced that permanent relocations were allowed. (People had been fleeing East Germany through Hungary all year.) At first, people were nervous, but once the process started, the wall came down nearly as suddenly as it went up.





ABC's Coverage of the Fall of the Berlin Wall.

My favorite.... piece of art?

Well, as I've had to do a review of a movie and a review of a CD, I figured I may as well go for the complete set, this time reviewing a book.

My absolute favorite book (if I can only pick one) is Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. It's been my favorite book for almost a decade now; I think the first time I read it was in fourth grade. I even own it in two languages. (Harry Potter und der Gefangene von Askaban is going to make my German better one day...)

Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of the entire series, but this is the book that stands out. It's during this book that Harry comes to terms with how different he is, and that he's not a child anymore. He also realizes that he's got a family in Sirius, a family that he can love and that he wants to be a part of. That's the biggest reason this book is my favorite: It's the one time when it seems like Harry's life should get better. He stood up to his aunt and uncle, he has a teacher who is normal, despite being a werewolf, who teaches Harry how to ward off the dementors that aversely affect him more than anyone else -- he even was one of his father's best friends. For awhile, it just seems like things are going to work out. Quidditch goes well for most of the season, and he gets a gift from Fred and George that makes it much easier for him to "stay out" of trouble. Malfoy even gets his comeuppance from a hippogrif who won't take his insults.

But of course, he wouldn't be Harry Potter if he had a happy life. His broom gets crushed, his floating head is spotted off castle grounds, word gets out about Professor Lupin being a werewolf (wizards have prejudices, too) and the criminal who framed his godfather escapes. The boy is meant to suffer and struggle, but survive in the end. He's the literary posterchild for doing what's right even in the face of adversity. So thank you, J.K. Rowling for this incredible series.

Editorial Cartoons

I like this cartoon because it satirizes the way Bush went about his presidency. The opinion of this cartoonist is that he treated his position as more of a royal position where he could decree and justify what he pleased. This may not be the subtlist of cartoons, but I prefer the ones that are straightforward. I have to admit, though, that I don't understand exactly what is meant by "Nixon numbers," unless it's referring to low approval ratings, in which case, I hope the next section would be his bubble bursting.

This comment made me chuckle, though I can't tell exactly whether the cartoonist is saying what Obama's doing is a good thing or a bad thing. On one hand, it's good that he's taken on challenges, and Atlas did successfully carry the world on his back despite the difficulty, which is good news for Obama, but on the other hand, it's never good to bite off more than one can chew. Obviously Obama has a lot on his plate, but as the president, he can handle it.

This comic also deals with Obama's presidency, but I like this one because it shows how his intended course of action in the Middle East differs than that of his predecessor and others involved in the Muslim World. As I support peace and diplomacy over fighting, I hope Obama is able to accomplish something.

This one, words do not need to explain, as everything is clearly elaborated upon for the reader. That's why I chose it; I appreciated its snarky ways. Truly, words are not necessary.

In the ongoing battle between science and religion, I am often more inclined to go with science. Sure, there is no reason why there can't be a higher being, but I'm not going to deny something that can be proven, either. I like that this cartoon says that, obviously, when something isn't right, then of course the proper course of action is to challenge it. After all, why would you be wrong?

It goes without saying that the economy had to be included somehow, and what better way to do it than to tie it in with the current religious season? When everyone is giving something up voluntarily for Lent, let bills play a part in it too! That way you can seriously be out of luck for probably more than 40 days. I just liked that it showed, dryly, the way people are still dealing with having to manage with less.

Epitome of Disappointment.

Today, I woke up at 7:30 a.m. Anyone who knows me knows that I would typically never do such a thing on a day I don't have to be anywhere -- it's a struggle for me to wake up that early when I have to.

But I wanted to go Easter egg hunting, so I managed it. I was excited to walk around campus to find pastel-colored plastic eggs and stick them in my brightly colored Easter gift bag.

I found nothing.

There were no eggs left when the egg hunt started at 8 a.m. I walked around campus like a bright-eyed little girl, but as I continued to find only empty egg shells, I darkened. By the time I gave up, my self-esteem was devastated. I felt like the little kid who reached the piñata last at a birthday party and missed out on the candy.

And the reason for my soul-crushing experience? Cheating college kids who came out during the night and stole the eggs. I was so upset.

To make matters worse, as I was sitting in The George-Anne newsroom, I saw babies walking around campus. By babies, I mean 3-year-olds, but they are, they're babies. There were little girls walking around in Easter dresses and little boys in sweater vests with hope and excitement written all over there faces.

But they weren't going to find any. All because of college students who have no sense of honor.

This is not what the babies looked like.

Two-party system: Black & white? Or red & blue?

In American politics, it is common knowledge that we have two main political parties: Democrats and Republicans. It's been this way for decades, but why are there only two major parties?

1. There really is a lot of consensus on broad issues in the U.S.

• Capitalism and the idea of a free market
  
• Freedom of the press
  
• National security (we should have it)

2. History

• There were two factions when the Constitution was ratified, and it's just never been done differently

3. Our electoral system

• We have single-member districts where the winner takes all
  
• This is different than proportional representation, where seats are awarded based on voting percentage
  
• First-past-the-post voting system: The winner is the one with the most votes, even if it's not necessarily the majority

This kid is brilliant.

Letter to the Editor

Dear editor:

Next Thursday, April 8, people across the country will go barefoot for the day, or even just part of the day, to show they're participating in One Day Without Shoes. This event, promoted by TOMS Shoes and its founder, Blake Mycoskie, encourages people to experience what it's like for children around the world who can't afford a pair of shoes.

It's a simple act in which anyone can participate, but because it’s uncommon to see people without shoes, it provides a reason to explain TOMS's mission to those who don't understand why you're going barefoot. By enlightening one person, perhaps he will be inspired to purchase a pair of his shoes – and that means one more pair donated to a child who would otherwise go without them.

Many people are still worried about the economy and where their money is going, and this is a simple way to help make a difference. It also should serve as a reminder to people that, amidst all of the arguing and conflict in Washington D.C., there are issues elsewhere that deserve attention and solutions. So perhaps we should all be a little more appreciative of what we do have instead of just complaining.

Passions.... What are mine again?

People are passionate about many things -- art, music, literature, religion. To be passionate means to have strong feelings about or a strong belief in something, but to be perfectly honest, I'm rather apathetic about a lot.

It's just always been difficult for me to feel strongly about most things. I played soccer for 14 years, and I loved it and was good at it. But when I gave it up because I moved for my final year of high school, I wasn't bothered. I didn't miss it, and that's the longest I've ever been "attached" to something. I don't have the ear for music or an eye for art, so there's no passion from me for either of those. I enjoy both, undoubtedly. I just don't play an instrument or paint in my spare time. And I'm agnostic, so I don't really have a firm believe in a religion -- though I do passionately believe no one should force his religion upon others.

That's all I can figure my passions are: ideals. What I believe in, I believe passionately. I may not be the most vocal about it, but I don't think that diminishes the value of my passion any. I just don't want to be in people's faces about my beliefs because I don't like it when people try to force things upon me. I'll listen, and I'll discuss, but I have recently had to accept that at the end of the day, it very well may be that my opinion and your opinion starkly contrast. But that's okay.

Not everyone will have the same opinions, but these are the things in which I most passionately believe:

Peace. One day, I sincerely hope that people will understand war is not necessary. We were born with voices and rational thought; let's use them. Killing doesn't solve anything. It just hurts people and continues the problem.

Equality. I hate that discrimination is still evident in a society that claims to be so developed and modern. Equality may be guarenteed by law, but I don't think anyone could rightly say it's been eliminated in practice. I know everyone stereotypes, and there are more people who are racist than will ever admit to it, so we need to work harder to live up to the claims we make and ideal we maintain as a nation.

Choice. This has become something I've started feeling more passionately about recently. Everyone needs to have choices and should not be afraid to make a choice for himself or herself that hurts no one else. While I do not believe in proselytizing democracy, I do think that there are natural rights everyone is born with that one should be allowed to express no matter where in the world he is.

Everyone means well. Maybe I'm just naive. Maybe I'm overly optimistic. Actually, it probably is naivety. This one is complicated, because I also think people are selfish, just selfish with what should usually be good intentions. I don't think people originally set out to hurt each other. What initial reason is there to do so? But humans are emotionally creatures, and things get misconstrued. Of course, psychopaths are the exception here.

Religion should be personal. It irks me to no end when people try and force their beliefs upon me, especially when it's down in a way that involves telling me I'm going to hell. It's my business, between God and me, and I don't need the opinion of anyone else. There would be so much less fighting if people kept religion in their personal lives (then we could work on peace!!). It should also stay out of government so that everyone is afforded the same rights. (See my opinion on gay marriage.)

Oh, and I'm passionate about pizza, too. Cheese pizza. I love it.

Influences of Confucianism

Many people will take the topic of political thought and relate it to something that has affected the Western world. While I am not a proponent of the "Us vs. Them" concept, for the purposes of this blog I do want to focus on Eastern political thought, which spawned a different type of government because it is a different type of society.

In the West, as a general statement, society generally places the importance of the individual over the group. But in many Asian societies, blending in is expected, and people work to reach goals of the group. One reason for this is the role Confucianism played in the lives of those who established cohesive government centuries ago.

Confucianism is, first of all, not a religion. It is a philosophy and a way of establishing the relationship between the individual and society.

In China, believing in Confucianism is similar to believing in democracy in America. Confucius promoted five main relationships:

1. Ruler to Subject
2. Father to Son
3. Husband to Wife
4. Elder Brother to Younger Brother
5. Friend to Friend

The first two relate to politics, the second simply in that in many societies, especially the ones with strong Chinese influence, the emperor or other leader is akin to the father of the society, which is like the children.

There are three core features to Confucianism: Preserving order, hierarchy in social spheres, and correct conduct. The hierarchy especially, which places the emperor in a position unequal to the everyday citizen, is the root of the way people act today. They are expected to respect, be loyal to, and obey superiors, which is why they do not often question government (the Chinese revere Mao, for example, and the Japanese used to see their emperor as divine) the way we often do as a result of European Enlightenment philosophers.

Music Review: Girls Rock

I was originally very excited to listen to this CD. I love girls rock, so I half-expected to be familiar with some of the featured bands. And I was, with a couple. Overall though, I'd have to say I was disappointed in the lack of variety the CD provided because I felt the vast majority of the songs sounded like they came from the same, mediocre band.

The stand-out track of the CD was "Girl Anachronism." I love, love, love the Dresden Dolls. Amanda Palmer is a fabulous, artsy individual, and she has the coolest eyebrows (or lack thereof) I've ever seen. Since stumbling upon them in my first year of high school, "Girl Anachronism" has always been my favorite song, so I was thrilled to see it on this CD. The Dresden Dolls have a really unique sound that mixes cabaret-style with punk; the lyrics are brash, as she'll write exactly what she wants, so this track differed from every other. It's gritty, it's real, the piano playing is frantic, and the lyrics are insane. I highly recommend the group.

The track to which I would give the lowest rating is "Fairytale In the Supermarket" by The Raincoats because I'm not entirely sure what they were playing to make this sound, but in the background was a shrill, wailing noise that I just could not get over. Not to mention the fact that I could barely hear the singer over the band. I just did not like it at all.

I would have to say the biggest disappointment song was "Hot Topic" by Le Tigre, but this was mostly because I was expecting so much more, given that Kathleen Hanna fronted this band. It's not a bad song for when I'm in a chill mood, I just wouldn't say it's anything to dance to. It definitely wasn't what I expected, which was more energy. I expected that from almost all of these songs, but they failed to provide it.

Of course, the "girls rock" I'm used to includes Paramore, Hey Monday, Flyleaf, Nightwish, and The Dresden Dolls, to name a few, and they are products of recent years. The overall sound of this CD will be an acquired taste for me.

The track list, for those interested, is as follows:

1. The Patti Smith Group, "Dancing Barefoot"
2. Le Tigre, "Hot Topic"
3. Sonic Youth, "Bull In the Heather"
4. Sleater-Kinney, "One More Hour"
5. The Breeders, "Cannonball"
6. The Geraldine Fibbers, "California Tuffy"
7. Metric, "Succexy"
8. Yo La Tengo, "Moby Octopad"
9. The Dresden Dolls, "Girl Anachronism"
10. Throwing Muses, "Freeloader"
11. Liz Phair, "6'1""
12. The Raincoats, "Fairytale In the Supermarket"
13. Elastica, "Waking Up"
14. Kate Bush, "Running Up That Hill"
15. The Kelley Deal 6000, "Confidence Girl"
16. Ladytron, "Playgirl"
17. Ruby, "Bud"
18. Supreme Beings of Leisure, "Ain't Got Nothin'"
19. Yeah Yeah Yeahs, "Black Tongue"
20. Boss Hog, "Green Shirt"
21. that dog, "Retreat From the Sun"

Spring Break

Every spring semester, it is my sole goal to make it to spring break. If I can make it that far, I know I can get through the few remaining weeks and then escape into a 3-month summer vacation.

Today, I have reached that goal, and it is a weight off my shoulders. Literally. I don't have to carry a backpack for about 10 days.

But of course there's no such thing as being able to relax, even when time off is given to do so. It seems to me that the purpose of spring break is just to provide time to catch up or complete the larger projects given prior to its arrival. Without fail, I have at least one research paper to complete over every break I've had in college -- something I would, without the arrival of spring break, not be able to accomplish.

It always baffles me that so many people can escape to the beach for a week-long alcoholic party. Not that I can legally drink anyway, but I would just never have the time.

Why do they never have things to do?? Or do they just not care as much and will put fun before their schoolwork?

Whichever it is, I wish I had the opportunity just once to not do anything because I want to. I want the chance to sit and not worry about anything going on. I suppose I could develop a stronger work ethic and make time prior to spring break to complete my work (to be fair, everything I have to do was assigned in January), but it's just hard to work without a more immediate deadline. That's just journalism though.

It's okay. Sacrificing relaxation is the price that has to be paid when you're a perfectionist. One day, I'll get a break.

"Princess Mononoke" Review

Hiyao Miyazaki is without a doubt one of Japan's most internationally renowned filmmakers. His repertoire includes pieces like Howl's Moving Castle and Spirited Away, Japan's two top-grossing films, and, to round out the top three, Princess Mononoke.

Set in Japan's Muromachi period, Princess Mononoke is a combination of an adventure, a love story, and a tale of morals. The movie opens with Prince Ashitaka, the main protagonist, fighting a cursed demon, which transfers its curse to him. He leaves his village in order to meet his curse, instead of waiting for it to kill him, and eventually finds himself in Irontown. This town is right next to a great forest filled with animal gods, among them the shishigami and a small pack of wolves who have taken a human girl, San, as their own. Irontown and the animals are greatly at odds with each other, and it is up to Ashitaka to try and bring them together while finding a cure for his curse. Along the way, he of course falls in love with San, who is herself conflicted between the animals among whom she was raised and the human that she is.

Now, I have seen more than a couple of Miyazaki's films, and I have to say Princess Mononoke has been my favorite by far, mostly due to the plot. The majority of my favorite anime is such because of historical and/or fantastical elements. To me, this movie came across as a combination of the shows The Twelve Kingdoms and Wolf's Rain, and I loved it.

However, as is often the case, the dubbing in Princess Mononoke began to irritate me quickly. Sure, it goes with the mouth movements and such, but the dialouge often sounds awkward because things are not expressed the English speakers typically speak. The Japanese language has concepts that Americans have no words for, and we speak differently to each other regarding things like formality and titles, so often, the beauty of that is lost in translation. I understand it's not practical to learn an entire foreign language to watch a film, but I will nine times out of 10 recommend watching it in its native language with subtitles so the film sounds the way it's meant to sound.

This movie has such profound messages in it that I'm sure were much more effective pre-translation. There are also times when what the characters say, and the way they say it, just sound ridiculous in English. Flaws aside, it's beautifully drawn and the story is unique.

Geography

Americans, for some reason, have developed a worldwide reputation for not being very aware of the world around them -- probably because many people really don't know things. According to David Rutherford, "Young Americans just don't seem to have much interest in the world outside of the U.S."


From a British blogger.

A survey published in 2006 showed very discouraging results:

Despite nearly constant news coverage since the war there began in 2003, 63 percent of Americans aged 18 to 24 failed to correctly locate [Iraq] on a map of the Middle East. Seventy percent could not find Iran or Israel.

Nine in ten couldn't find Afghanistan on a map of Asia.

And 54 percent were unaware that Sudan is a country in Africa.

Remember the December 2004 tsunami and the widespread images of devastation in Indonesia?

Three-quarters of respondents failed to find that country on a map. And three-quarters were unaware that a majority of Indonesia's population is Muslim, making it the largest Muslim country in the world.

Half could not find New York State on a map of the United States.

A third of the respondents could not find Louisiana, and 48 percent couldn't locate Mississippi on a map of the United States, even though Hurricane Katrina put these southeastern states in the spotlight in 2005.

Fewer than three in ten think it's absolutely necessary to know where countries in the news are located. Only 14 percent believe speaking another language fluently is a necessary skill.

In 2002, a survey questioned the same age group was questioned in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Sweden, and Great Britain. The U.S. did worse than every country except Mexico. It is essential that students and people in general become geographically aware in a world that becomes more and more globalized every day. So, why don't many Americans have a solid grasp on geography?






Obviously, if you're from South it's because we don't have maps.
And if you represent the 6-year-old demographic, it's because to some people, the United States and Asia look similar, or.... you're stupid.

Oh, Georgia.

The University System of Georgia has proposed an additional $300 million cut to next year's budget, we all know this by now. The thing is, it was announced less than a week ago, and already, I'm just tired of hearing about it. There is only so much one can know at this point when the final decision won't come until April, so I'm just tired of having people complain in my face(book) all the time.

This is mostly because I assume the fire will die down, and I'm just waiting for it. Sure, students are outraged about it now, but I assume it's because it came as such a shock to everyone, and that's fair. I doubt, though, that everyone cares as much deep down as they do right now. There was outrage when it happened, and there are Facebook groups galore, but what is anyone who "says" he cares really doing? Not too much, as can be seen in the real world.

Of course it's a shame that people are going to lose their jobs, our university will no longer be able to market its "small feel" with core classes of 200 students, and programs will suffer at the merciless hands of legislators. But if you want to see results, go out and do something. Please, get off of Facebook.

What would be really moving, in my opinion, is if all the schools affected by this inordinate demand from the state went on strike until some other way to make up this money was found. Education should not have to pay the price for someone else's mismanagement of funds. In fact, education would hopefully prevent that from happening too often.

If you read The George-Anne, this probably sounds something like the editorial from 4 March. Well-spotted; I helped write it. Really, be proactive or don't complain.

Forerunners of the Constitution

The writers of the Constitution, while intelligent men without a doubt, did not completely come up with the ideals for the laws written there themselves. They of course were influenced by great philosophers, namely three important men of the European Age of Enlightenment: Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

Thomas Hobbes: Born in England in 1588, Hobbes is most known today in the field of political philosophy for his book Leviathan and the social contract theory. He also believed that humans in their natural state are, at their core, selfish, but rational. So the social contract theory asserts that people enter into a contract with the government in which they will give up some of their natural rights in exchange for certain protections that are in their best interest.

John Locke: Locke is another English philosopher born after Hobbes in 1632, making him a younger contemporary. While also important to the social contract theory, Locke is also responsible for the theory that people are basically good in a natural state and it is entering into society that can corrupt them. It is his views whose influence can be best seen in our Constitution, and Locke's most renowned piece of work is Two Treatises on Government. Locke also believed the Law of Nature to be that one would not harm another based on the other's "life, health, liberty, or possessions." As part of his theories, too, Locke also believed that if people did not deem their government to be fit, it is their right to dissolve their social contract and reframe the government. (That should sound like a familiar justification.)

Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Born in Geneva in 1732, Rousseau was the last born of these three philosophers. He is well known for his theory of the "noble savage," which asserts man is happiest somewhere in between completely wild and completely civilized. His theory also states that we define who we are by what society thinks of us, and that we give up freedom and individuality in exchange for civilization. Rousseau also believed that in the event the government broke the social contract, the people had the right to tear it down.

These three men had ideals that gave the writers of the Constitution a basis for the laws and regulations written there. They're the reason we have the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," among other things.

American Culture Defined

The American culture is incredibly diverse and varies among regions, ethnicities, and genders, at least, so it's difficult to try and pick any one thing to define it. The complications increase when one considers there are different types of cultures -- there's pop culture, traditional culture and subcultures, to name a few.

But last year was easily a groundbreaking year for one individual who dominated the music scene and changed people's perception of pop culture for years to come: Lady Gaga.

Lady Gaga won nearly 50 awards last year alone, including ones from MTV, the Grammys, Nickelodeon, People's and Teen Choice, and a variety of international ceremonies. She had five singles, and another was released shortly after we entered 2010. All of these songs can still be heard on pop radio stations an entire year later. Stefani Germanotta has become an international phenomenon.

Easily, one of clearest ways she has achieved this status is by being more than just a music artist. Lady Gaga is known just as well for her outrageous fashions and off the wall live performances. Anyone who saw her perform "Paparazzi" at MTV's Video Music Awards last year could vouch that, depsite liking or disliking it, it was certainly memorable. Here it is, if you haven't seen it:



Lady Gaga is so incredible because she devotes herself completely to the persona she's created. She toes the boundaries of "acceptable" pop culture, and people are drawn to her for it. Her song "Poker Face" is about thinking of being with a girl while being with a guy, her outfits are constantly extreme, and she embraced the rumor of her being a hermaphrodite by recently appearing in a magazine wearing a strap-on. But her persona aside, she is truly talented. She's a powerful singer and plays the piano, so it's not that she's famous only for being eccentricly outrageous.

She may not represent the American culture of the everyday person, but Lady Gaga is surely one of, if not the, top people of 2009. If she can take the entire nation by surprise and has the success to back it up, then she deserves "The Fame." Besides, the country could use someone to keep everyone on his toes.

Mean What You Say

There are thousands upon thousands of words used today in the English language alone. The Oxford English Dictionary has entries for 171,476 words in current use, and there are thousands more that are considered obsolete.

With so many words to choose from, it's imperative to use the words that most clearly express the intended idea. In middle school, teachers often said not to use words like "good" or "nice" because there are other words to use that are "better." However, all of those words -- like good, fantastic, awesome, superb, terrific, wonderful -- all have slightly different meanings because they're different words.

The one word that particularly bothers me of those is "terrific" because of the way it's used today. Often, it is used in positive context, but really, the word means "very bad; frightful." It makes sense when one examines the other forms of the word -- "terror," "terrible," "terrifying," and "terribly" all connote negative images.


Children do bad things sometimes, sure, but I'm not sure that's what the intended meaning was.

Communication is vital to daily life, there's no getting around it. In written forms of communication, like critical writing, it does wonders for one's credibility to be able to write cleanly, concisely, and with words that convey exactly what the author means.

2010 Winter Olympics

The winter Olympics are not a big deal to me. The only Olympic sport I've ever followed is women's soccer, and I haven't done that for years. I just dislike the cold, so seeing people willingly participate in sports that require such weather just baffles me. I do like figure skating, though I am always petrified someone is going to slice him- or herself dreadfully on those sharp skate blades.

This year, as I'm sure everyone who doesn't live under a rock is aware, the danger was in luging, however, and that is the topic I would like to dedicate the most time to in this blog. Nodar Kumaritashvili, a 21-year-old Georgian luger, died during a practice run when he hit about 90 mph on the track that was known to be dangerous.


The track was subsequently fixed to be "less dangerous," but let's go over some other issues here. Luging is a dangerous sport. Of course it's potentially lethal; there's practically nothing between the luger and the unrelenting ice he's covering at speeds at which it's illegal to drive a car. My question is Why is this a sport at all?? I mean really, has no one sat down and considered that the concept of this sport is crazy in the first place? Don't get me wrong, if you want to do it on your own time, be my guest -- I think it sounds like fun -- but to sanction it as an internationally competitive sport is just asking for problems. The competitors obviously want to win, and to do that, it means that they have to go faster. Someone was bound to get on the wrong side of fate sometime.

Comparative Advantage

The concept of comparative advantage is usually attributed to the book "On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation," written by David Ricardo in 1917. He coined the term when comparing production in England and Portugal. In essence, comparative advantage refers to someone or something to produce a good/service for a lower opportunity cost than another. It encourages people to specialize in what provides the lowest opportunity cost.



Example 1, Comparative Advantage In Practice:
-- Suppose Company ABC and Company XYZ each produce cars and airplanes, and the principle of ceteris paribus is applicable.
-- Company ABC produces cars and airplanes that are more structurally sound and more popular among consumers than Company XYZ's.
-- That means Company ABC has an absolute advantage.
-- However, it is not in Company ABC's interests to establish a monopoly and produce everything itself. It's actually cheaper for Company XYZ to produce airplanes.
-- Therefore, it benefits both companies if Company ABC specializes in cars instead of airplanes and if Company XYZ specializes in airplanes instead of cars. They can trade with each other and it's more beneficial.



Example 2, Comparative Advantage With Numbers:

"Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog" Review

I love Joss Whedon's shows, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" most of all. One would be hard-pressed to find a musical that I don't like. So knowing that, it should have been a guaranteed assumption that Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog would have been a joyous occasion for me. In some respects, it was -- I enjoyed the occassional bursts into song because I think they sang well. Aside from that, however, I more often than not found myself wondering Really? for the entire 40 minutes.

Dr. Horrible's was written during the writer's strike in 2008, intended to be a short film exclusively for the Internet. It takes place in three acts and is filmed to be like entries to Dr. Horrible's (Neil Patrick Harris) video blog.

The one thing I liked about this movie is that it was humorously from the "villain's" point of view. Dr. Horrible's main goal is to become a member of the Evil League of Evil, and, of course, get the girl -- Penny, from the laundromat. The way he starts out, though, Dr. Horrible is very much akin to Dr. Drakken of Disney Channel's "Kim Possible." He tries so hard to be evil, and it's just not going his way, so he's more of a pitiable character than a hated, evil villain. And then once it becomes apparent that the "superhero," Captain Hammer, is a pig-headed misogynist, the viewer feels even worse for Dr. Horrible because Captain Hammer stole the girl from right under his nose. Of course, at the end of the movie, to me, it seemed as though Dr. Horrible did a complete 180, though that may just be because he lost one of the only two things he really wanted.

I am in absolutely no way qualified to critique a movie in any higher form than "Did you like the movie? Yes." I am not cinematically inclined, nor am I very critical when it comes to movies. Movies are a form of art -- at least, when not produced purely for mass entertainment, but this is not going to become a rant -- and as such, it's the director's view that matters most. If he had a specific intent for the piece, and I don't like it, I'm not going to critique it. I understand that all art is critiqued, but I'm not going to be the one to critique artistic elements. I will just say the plot left me more confused than anything, but of course, it's not a film I'd've watched if I didn't have to for class.

Fast Food Industry

It is safe to say that McDonald's has become a standard symbol of the Western world, and of the U.S. in particular. Knowing that, it's easier to see why some nations have a problem with Westernization -- out of all the things we have in our country, McDonald's and other fast food chains should not be the things that we export as a symbol of our way of life. All they do is promote obesity disguised as convenience, and it's time Americans recognize this and demand change.


There would be so much less wrong with the concept of fast food if the majority of Americans developed some sense of self-control and self-awareness. Fast food is not vital to one's diet and therefore should not be eaten multiple times a day, ideally not even multiple times a week. But no. People keep eating it and eating it and then wonder five years later what they possibly could have done to result in such high LDL cholesterol levels and clogged arteries. Not only that, but people get fat. Sorry if that's too blunt, but it's true. We are heading down the road of becoming an obese society, if we aren't there already. And still, people get so offended about weight comments when it's not even intended as an insult. Wake up, it's true. You're fat. If you don't like to hear it, or you can't admit to it, do something about it instead of complaining. And as a side note, whether you do or do not care, please dress appropriately for your body. That should be a given. Everyone of every body type has something that, when worn properly, looks good for them. (See: TLC's What Not to Wear.)

That aside, I think this epidemic is a social problem at its roots. Fast food was developed as a means of eating on the go, and now people are constantly go, go, go in everyday life. What I fail to understand, however, is why the fast food industry developed into something so unhealthy, overall. There's nothing wrong with the concept of food-on-the-go, but how did it come to be filled with the wrong kinds of fat, hundreds of calories, and perpetually fried? Sure, now there's Subway, but it didn't become an exceptionally popular eatery until Jared's weight loss starred in commercials. People have already started to recognize that fast food is not the very best choice given the nutrition that comes along with it, and some chains have started to make their food "healthier," but still, more change needs to occur before too many of their customers die. It shouldn't matter that it's cheaper to produce things in an unhealthy manner -- maybe customers would feel better about coming back more often if they didn't have to worry about having a heart attack at an uncommonly early age.

Now let's look at McDonald's restaurants around the world to see what fast food is like internationally.


McDonald's India

McDonald's Arabia, McDonald's Germany