I know, those are some dreaded words if you are a student or a teacher but it's true.
August brings new opportunities, new adventures and new articles to this site. With just two weeks before I report back to FHS we have a lot more ground to cover as we finish this summer long project. Starting tomorrow we have ANOTHER guest column, this time by another esteemed English teacher Ms. Patty Smith. I know all you ARGS kids will be excited and for my Freedom kids you will get the pleasure of reading her post and exploring her amazing mind. If you want to add your voice to this project time is running out. Let me know and enjoy your final July day.
0 Comments
By Felisha Nguyen
I’ve been on a bit of a social media hiatus. Rather, let me rephrase that: I’ve been hiding from Facebook because my newsfeed terrifies me. I’m doing the ostrich in the sand thing, shoving my head so deep into Instagram to get my social media fix without engaging with the tougher questions that Facebook brings up. My newsfeed is fraught with warnings about Trump, Hillary, the upcoming election, black people getting shot, refugees starving and washing up on shores, riots in the street, trans people being killed, bathrooms being bombed... Overall, it’s not a great place to be. As someone who has recently suffered a great personal tragedy, I’m not in the headspace for this kind of place. This social media onslaught of terrible things that happen in the world, even if I’m mostly in an echo chamber of my friends (problematic in it’s own way, I know, I know), is just too much for me. So I hide. I know it’s not the right thing, and I know that come election time, it’s not going to be helpful. But I’m Team #AnyoneButTrump, for good or for bad, and that means that no amount of social media is going to change my mind. If I choose to engage with it, which I do, in spurts, I can certainly seek out news sources for myself. Am I falling into the trope of the uninformed millennial? Or am I reserving my energy for these kinds of conversations when they truly matter, when I see a picture of one of my friends waiting in line for the Trump rally and then see him, standing in front of me? What do I say? I walk away. Too often, the people around me seem ready to take the dec incredibly seriously, to abolish the government that they find is unfit simply because it disagrees with their stances. At this point, we’re running into so many brick walls emblazoned with the words “I hate both candidates,” or “the lesser of two evils” and I wonder what we’ll do in the face of actual rebellion. I doubt it will come to that, though, and maybe I’m naive, but personally, I think that social media has made it all too easy to tout our words without acting on them. Maybe one day, I’ll act. Maybe one day, I’ll take up arms against The Newsfeed and The People Behind It and battle back. Ideally, it’ll be face-to-face because a keyboard is both an excellent shield and sword. Until then, call me an ostrich. Newflash: There is this guy named Donald Trump running for President.
Now I am not the first one to compare Mr. Trump to the Declaration of Independence, Tyler Anderson did that very well. Yet I could not read the next part of the Declaration in our intellectual journey and not be reminded of the speech Trump gave this past Thursday accepting the Republican nomination. Political speeches, particularly forward-thinking ones must always strike a balance. You have to explain the necessity of change (the bad) and contrast with your vision (the good). Ronald Reagan has been mentioned quite a bit this week for his positive messages, rekindling the "City Upon a Hill" mantra of John Winthrop while still attacking his predecessors (Are you better off now than you were four years ago?). The media believed Mr. Trump was far too negative in his acceptance speech, absolutely condemning/lambasting the Obama administration and painting a terrifying image of the world we live in today. It's not my place to say whether or not I agree with this assessment but it is curious that the Declaration of Independence suffers a similar problem. We may remember the positive, hopeful and inspiring quotations like "all men are created" and "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" but the majority of the Declaration actually mirrors the same doom and gloom of Trump's speech. Don't believe me, let's compare the next section of the Declaration to Trump's acceptance speech. I recently learned about a Tony-winning play that it set during the Early Republic of American History.
It follows the drama inside President Washington's cabinet as one brave Founding Father fights for the ideals of the American people and to preserve this country for the future. Oh and the play ran in the year 1943. That's right, Hamilton the Musical may be record-breaking and visionary in several respects but it is far from the first Broadway attempt to discuss America's founding. The key difference in this play called The Patriots, besides the lack of rap songs, is the protagonist and antagonist are switched. Jefferson is the man of the people, fighting against despotism as he did in the Declaration of Independence and Hamilton is the corrupt, immigrant bastard who distrusts people and wants a strong centralized government to rule the unwashed masses. Indeed, Lin Manuel Miranda's greatest accomplishment is not getting people to know Hamilton, but branding him a hero. Hamilton, as important as he is, has often been portrayed as a bit of an outcast and villain by historians from the inception of American history. "If men were angels, no government would be necessary" Hamilton's famous line from Federalist 51 has defined his view of life. He distrusted the common man and found them to be easily manipulated and uneducated enough on policy to have much of a voice at all in government. He wanted the President to serve for life, essentially recreating the British government. He even sold out John Jay in negotiations with Great Britain to prevent a severing of the two countries relationship. So while 1943's play is not nearly as famous today, it is important for its historiography. What Founding Father will get redeemed by history next? John Jay? Thomas Paine? Find out more about the musical in this podcast: http://backstoryradio.org/shows/hamilton/ But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
So we have been talking about the causes of revolution and Jefferson's cry that bloody insurrection must always be the course of last resort. Yet, in his next breath he takes something so radical and adds another "r" word: responsibility. Revolution should never be used for trivial causes but when the "long train of abuses and usurpations" merit it, we do not just have the option but the duty. Oh man, no one likes the word duty. This election year I am sure you remember your parents telling you it is your DUTY to vote. Duty involves obligation, being forced do something whether you want to or not. Wait, isn't that a violation of liberty? Should I not get the right to choose whether or not to overthrow my government? Is Jefferson being a hypocrite (again?) or is there more going on in this part of the Declaration of Independence? Let's dig deeper. I apologize for the lack of articles the past few days.
Let's just say I have been pre-occupied with things but I do not want this website or your interest for this site to die. My journey through the Declaration will continue soon and we still have some great guest columnists lined up. So what can we do while Mr. Gibson is slacking on the job? Read the guest columns here, here, here and here. Comment and use this thread as an open forum. Who should we get to contribute? What would you contribute? Ideas for a future topic next summer: Should we keep the theme of using a culminating document or something else? Enjoy your Wednesday! People may no longer be feeling the Bern but everyone's favorite Democratic Socialist gave Hillary Clinton much more of a scare than anyone could have predicted.
The Vermont Senator needed music to pump up the crowds at his speeches across America and I must admit I am always intrigued by the musical choices. For example, Hillary Clinton has relied heavily on "Fight Song" by Rachel Platten which makes sense on several levels. Donald Trump, also fittingly sticks to Twisted Sister's "We're Not Gonna Take It". Bernie's theme of course is the same theme of this project: revolution. He has often thrown this word around in speeches and the soundtrack fits this ideology. Here is a look at the list Who wins the music contest between these candidates? Another Saturday means another open forum on the website.
Now usually I don't get anything here, and by usually I mean ever but that does not mean I will censor you. I am giving you the opportunity, the choice is yours. Some topics in the news, the failed revolution/coup in Turkey, the horrific terrorist incident in Nice, France and of course the continued political drama in the United States. What stuck out to you this week? What would the Founding Fathers think about Pokemon Go? Imagine if it was Founding Fathers Go, I would try to catch John Jay personally but feel free to pick your own Founding Father. Anyways, light and trivial, deep and meaningful, this website is for everything and we want to hear your voice so try it out! Maybe you check out this site on a whim are intrigued but do not feel the need to contribute because your knowledge of the American Revolution is not up to snuff.
After all, US History class was a long time ago and all those battles blend together after awhile. Thanks to the internet and dramatic music I can offer you a refresher. Campaign 1776 has created an interactive map of the American Revolution but it is much more than a map. It features epic narrators, dramatic music, shooting, marching and the occasional map. It is perfect in our world where we need over-the-top hyper-realistic presentations to keep our attention. The link is here What I find interesting about the very first video of Lexington and Concord is when they talk about colonial motivations. Nowhere do you hear the inalienable rights that Jefferson will later make the focus of the war. It makes me wonder how we can really claim truth on this matter of what the colonists were fighting for. My guess is those reasons are as diverse as humanity itself. So what is the story we tell ourselves and what purpose does that serve? Things to think about while you are listening to the videos.
Revolutions are messy. Violence is terrifying and the result is always in flux.
There is a reason that revolution is usually more talk than actual action and that is because of the dire consequences a full-scale revolution creates. In our journey through the Declaration of Independence we just read the most radical statement in the document about "abolishing" government when it becomes destructive towards our fundamental rights. That sentence is directly followed by the most conservative sentence in the entire document and the focus of this article. So let's take a look: Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. |
AuthorFollow me @MrG_Unit Archives
August 2016
Categories
All
|