Blog entry Semester 2: #4 - Maaz Mateen 1B

On this final post for AM. Studies I would like to discuss about September 11th. This week has been focusing around the 90's, but the main event in which we have been focusing these last few weeks of school on has been 9/11.
First I want to talk about the News video we watched in class. It was odd to see that a news station was already o the story before we could even see any sort of help arrive. Also watching that second plane crash gave me some insight into the amount of confusion that was happening.
The Confusion was so clear when the News reporters were trying to find some reason in which to blame the crashes on. They suggested that it was some GPS malfunction or something. Now I can start to recognize the position that President Bush was in.
The Bush administration must have been under a lot of pressure to give an explanation. They needed and explanation ASAP before the people became too concerned for their safety. Bush needed a solution, and that solution was Osama Bin Laden. Osama Bin Laden gave a face to which the people of America could point their anger towards.

Blog entry #11 - Maaz Mateen 1B

For the past few weeks of American Studies, we have been studying the Cold war and its entirety. It was a very long war and it had many components to it, so I am not disappointed. However another thing that was important to American history during the cold war was the civil rights outbreak. It was led by MLK Jr. and LBJ, and as we see often in American history. When there is a civil rights outburst then a women's rights movement will come along and so will many other of the rights movements. Why does this happen? My hypothesis is that of all of the rights/equality movements, civil rights is the most prominent at least in Am. history. This is why it creates a confidence in the other movements. Is this important though, does it matter? I don't really know. Does this belittle the other movements? Probably not, but it is something to think about.

Another thing I want to mention is that we are practically skipping the 70s and 80s. Although Mr. Hoffman basically said it was fine, according to the research I did for my video that's not quite true. A lot of Cold war events took place in the seventies (SALT). I am not trying to argue or anything, just voicing an opinion I think I share with others.

The third thing I wanted to talk about was about President JFK. He was a very prominent figure in the 1960s, probably because of his assassination. He promised great things and accomplished even more. However the fact that the American people did not see his full and true potential and capability must have created a great media hype at the time. Perhaps JFK led the legacy he did because of his legacy, to create a parallel I will demonstrate an example. I have done a bit of research on President Richard Nixon (A president we are not going to learn about because of the skipping of the 70-80s) and from what I see. A lot of people hated him for some reasons, but the main hate came at the end of his term where he was caught doing a scandal dubbed the Watergate scandal. If Nixon had been assassinated before the Watergate scandal, would his legacy be similar to that of JFK?

Blog entry #10 - Maaz Mateen 1B

This week of American history has been emphasizing the Cold war and its importance. The Cold war is not exactly the traditional idea of warfare, it focused around ideas like the policy of containment and such. Two countries trying to rise to the top of the chain. One side is the U.S. currently at the top because of how WWII turned out, On the other side is the USSR with communism as it's weapon. What I want to touch up on is how sad it is to see the U.S. attempting at creating hate for Communism.

During the Cold war, the U.S. was ridden with anti communist hysteria. The majority was against communism, and to me it felt like the HUAC and the government was using this as a justification for some really ugly stuff. There were many programs that went to such length simply because the government had the excuse to always say it was for the fight against communism. Creating files on thousands of American (many of whom who were not related to communism)? That's fine, as long as it's for the fight against communism. Sentencing a couple to death simply because they were communist? That's fine as long as it's fpr the fight against communism. I am exaggerating a bit here, but I do feel like this was something that was happening. This was called a "red scare" after all. The U.S. was scared to some extent. Communism was a formidable opponent for many reasons, but one of the most prominent ones was the domino effect. As communism was spread to one country, then another country would soon also become communist until many other countries had become communist in Europe. Thus spreading the "iron curtain" around Europe.

Blog entry #9 - Maaz Mateen 1B

This week was rather eventful not only in Am. Studies but also in Am. Lit. The two classes are correlating together rather oddly. We are learning about the struggle of women in Florida during the lat 1800's and early 1900's. In Studies we are observing the roaring 20's in its entirety. I want to talk about prohibition, lynchings, and women's rights.

Prohibition was a huge aspect of the 1900's, one documentary we viewed in class displayed America to be a drunken country that was tripping over its won shoelaces. So some higher ups had the motivation to try to completely rid america of its drunkery. But Mr. Hoffman mentioned that some higher ups were actually drinking during the prohibition period. So what was the point? How many higher-ups actually cared for the well-being of America when they were passing prohibition? I know that for women Prohibition was a legitimate cause to fight for to stop domestic violence. Of course, people easily were still able to drink alcohol, and I am not sure if prohibition was actually affecting domestic violence at the time.

When making the presentation for studies, I came upon the subject of lynchings. These things were terrible and horrible events. Usually related to the KKK in some way, they were events to execute and mutilate black men for a crime they probably did not even commit. Sometimes mayors and judges would even attend these horrible events. The had postcards for the lynchings and everything. It shocked me so much when I saw how much African-Americans were still discriminated against (especially in the south).

Women were extremely active during the 1920's. They were able to vote, and start to get shots at national sports. To me it seemed that the 1920's were supposed to be a conservative time for America, however not for women. Women just seemed to keep changing during the 1920's. Not just in mind but also physicality. Women started to wear different clothes and flaunt their freedom around.

Blog entry #8 - Maaz Mateen 1B

The past week we focused a lot on how America got involved with International problems. I want to focus a lot on Spain and how America dealt with them, along with the path America took for movement during the Indian Wars. First off the whole thing with the men in California either having to sail all the way across south America, or having to cross panama. To me, it seemed highly unnecessary. I wondered why they didn't go through Canada, Mr. Hoffman said something like " there were no roads, and it was pretty much empty". I mean I understand why someone might have not wanted to go through there for the transfer of gold. However I still believe it is a much easier route then going all the way around south america or even crossing Panama. I'm sure it would have been much more convenient to be involved with Canada rather than Panama. What do you think might have happened if we found a way to transfer gold through Canada? The second topic is the whole thing with Spain. I really found it kind of sudden how America started to war with the Philippines right after they "helped" free them. I also found it a little odd that America proposed their own governor, then allowed only people who would vote for him to vote in Cuba. In general I felt that the way America treated their first few international businesses was a little odd and controlling.

Blog entry #7 - Maaz Mateen 1B

This week we focused almost completely on the Native Americans. We learned of the three forms of Americanization that the Indians were put through. However the most interesting topic for me were the schools. I was intrigued by what these young children endured for their tribes. Both of the children that we read about had agreed to go to these schools for the sake of courage. Why do you think "courage" was such a big deal for these children? The second most interesting thing that shocked me was how brutal the Indian wars were. Mr. Hoffman mentioned that American soldiers fired on Indians even though they were holding white flags. This confused me, because America had abolished slavery, hinting that America wants peace. However the Indians were brutally murdered. The least important act of Americanization were the treaties. From the beginning I had already guessed that the treaties would not work for many reasons. One of the reasons was that the treaty was only for the Sioux tribe. This must have caused some trouble for the other tribes. Which of the three acts of Americanization was the most interesting to you?

Blog entry #6 - Maaz Mateen 1B

Our class these past few weeks mainly focused around these three images, and I felt that the image overhead was the most important as it held all the persuasive appeals. What do you think was the most important/interesting image, and why? For the people in Communications or speech class, we are familiar with these 3 techniques and have gone quite in depth. For this image specifically there is a lot of Logos going on. There are many words, which mostly contain facts and other such logical appeals. However what I think is the most persuasive role in the image is most certainly the black man just sitting there doing nothing. I feel that this paper is trying to make emotional appeal through this man. At that people were used to seeing the opposite of this happening. Never was the black man not working or being put into unpaid labor. Now they have literally reversed the conditions making the people of America feel emotion. The emotion of desire. To desire equality after all of this hardship we put ourselves through. We fought through slavery and now all we want is equality, even if the black man should deserve more at this time. I KNOW that equality for all is better.
What do you think about the in-fighting of the republicans?