U.S. Soldier Kills Five Comrades

The New York Times reported today that a U.S. soldier stationed in Baghdad killed five of his comrades (click here for the article). Apparently, the soldier was recovering at a clinic for soldiers suffering from war stress.

The easy thing to do is simply make this soldier out to be a villain, to turn him into a sad case of someone who "lost it" during the war. But in the interest of trying to understand how the soldier could do this, it's our job to explore how this could happen -- not in order to excuse it, but in order to find greater clarity in a tragedy.

Are there any artifacts we've read this unit that would help explain how something like this could happen?

Simulation Day

Feel free to create a comment thread here for sharing your thoughts on the simulation.

Do you have any last-minute questions? Strategies? Any lessons you'd like to apply to the simulation from the past unit?

Good luck!

Cars, Layoffs -- Someone has to pay!

Remember the video we watched earlier in this unit that detailed the rise of the Ford assembly line? Well, one of the United States' oldest car manufacturers (GM) is in big trouble. Just recently, President Obama allegedly encouraged GM's CEO to step down. Does this firing seem like a case of the "sacrificial lamb"? There are some connections to AIG bonuses here, too; perhaps this is another case of the public wanting some vindication for the current financial crisis. Here's the link:

"GM boss steps down"

"In the Name of the Romantic Ideal:" American Romanticism (or at least Latin American Romanticism)

Last week one of our classmates made a comment about Che Guevera and his tendency to be Romanticized by Latin Americans, and in some cases, by citizens of the U.S. Even though it's technically not a case of Romanticism in the U.S.A., I couldn't resist posting this because it's such a great example of what Twain criticizes in "Huck Finn."

Click here to have a listen.

I love the phrase the write-in listener uses at the end of her comment: "false heroes to get lost in." How do we, as Americans, get "lost" in heroes?

The Civil War in 4 1/2 Minutes

Bay Area Shooting

Several weeks ago in the Bay Area a man was shot by police officers after he was detained on the platform of subway stop. What’s most shocking about the shooting is that the man was completely incapacitated by the police officers when he was shot. (He was face-down with two officers above him; one officer had his knee on his neck and the officer who fired his gun stepped back and shot him in the back while he was on the ground). Californians protested the killing last Wednesday night and riots eventually broke out in downtown Oakland. Here’s a NY Times article on last week’s events:

New York Times article

We’re sharing this event because it’s a classic AS artifact. While it might be easy to accept or disseminate a highly biased telling of this narrative, we need to ask ourselves these questions: why was the man shot? What’s his story? What are the police officers’ stories? Where’s bias in the video that captured the shooting? Of the various news reports? Where do these narratives intersect to reveal the truth?

And more importantly, this example connects with our unit on Agency and Oppression. How was this man oppressed? How are his family and friends oppressed? How will individuals attempt to turn this into an opportunity for agency? How have community members sought agency in this tragedy? Is protesting a meaningful way of asserting agency? What about rioting?

And lastly, we need to ask this question: did the man’s race impact the fact that he was shot? Would this have happened if he weren’t black? While this question might seem to blatantly insert race into this discussion (a move Americans frequently criticize) I’d argue it’s a fair and obvious question given our country’s history of violence towards blacks. Dodging the question would simply avoid a crucial aspect of this narrative.

Here’s a clip of the video captured by a bystander on a cell phone, and as a disclaimer, it’s graphic, so don’t watch if you think it will be too disturbing.

Blog Moratorium

Hey there - Just reminding you all that we'll take a break from blogging the next three weeks. As of Monday, December 15th, you should have three posts and one comment since our last blog check on November 17th.

You won't need to post again until we return from winter break.

No TV???

When the Chicago area was inundated with rain one weekend months ago, our roof leaked and water dripped onto our TV, ruining it. Since then, we have gone without television in our house. I know what you may be thinking--how are we able to live??? But I've found that the essential things I want from TV can be gotten in other ways--I get news from the web, I catch episodes of my favorite shows online and rent DVDs, I listen to Bears games on WBBM. I've found that much of what I used to watch on TV I hardly miss, and I often wonder how I ever had time to watch so much TV. Much of what Thoreau suggests in Walden seems like it couldn't possibly work, but what if we tried it? How much of what we consider "essential" would become irrelevant?

Do we embrace simplicity at NT?

In class today we’ll map out a “typical” New Trier student’s day in order to explore the question posed in the title of this blog post. As you read Thoreau the next week or so, look closely at his ideas on simplifying life and getting in touch with the true necessities and juxtapose his ideas against your typical day at school. Do any of his thoughts resonate with you?

You may also want to set up a time (middle of the day, perhaps?) to complete one of your Transcendentalism maxims so you can accurately evaluate HDT’s ideas in light of how they apply to your life in a typical school day.

And lastly, here’s a Times article on Americans trying to simplify their lives: New York Times.

Can you see yourselves doing this someday?

Emeeeeeeerson Reading Progress?

Now that you've spent some time doing some "deep reading" with Emerson, what are your thoughts on this type of heavy, dense reading? Does it feel extra difficult in light of Nicholas Carr's assertion that digital texts make it more difficult for us to appreciate long, sustained reading? (Carr is the guy who wrote the article, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" Remember him?)

One way to make sense of difficult texts is to share your thoughts on reading strategies. In the next week, post a quick comment to this blog post, a thought on a reading strategy you've found useful for reading R.W.E.

Keep being deep readers, folks. (By the way, is Emerson even reading the book in this picture? Maybe he's in a transcendental state...)

"I have no expectation that any man will read history aright..."

Remember this quote above? It should look familiar (it is, after all, on our blog). Here it is again in full:

I have no expectation that any man will read history aright, who thinks that what was done in a remote age, by men whose names have resounded far, has any deeper sense than what he is doing to-day.

As you all know by now, something happened last night that will resound through history books for the rest of your lives. And as Emerson argues in the quote above, what happened yesterday is history, and you all lived it.

And it's appropriate we celebrate both candidates by giving Senator McCain the stage, too. McCain delivered a magnanimous concession speech in which he identified the historic nature of the recent election. In case you missed it, here it is:

Senator McCain

Tuesday Night Preparation

Early this week we'll continue our discussion of the election by having you visit the New York Times interactive Electoral College map. Here's the link:

Map

The nice thing about the map is if you click on the link titled "Your map" you'll be able to change which states vote red or blue and see the results in Electoral College votes. This website helps illustrate how the process works (a nice connection to the Constitution) and it will also help you anticipate what you should look for as you watch the results Tuesday night. Have fun!

We're all really "red"-blooded Americans after all...

I couldn't believe how many connections there were to our class in Jon Meacham's latest article in Newsweek. He basically argues that America is generally conservative (right of center, to be precise), and that even if the Democrats win BIG, Obama will more effective if he is pragmatic and recognizes that Americans are basically more conservative than liberal. This is especially ironic to me given that Obama has cast himself as the candidate of hope and idealism. But perhaps that's how our political system has been set up from the Revolutionary era... we want to bring someone into power who inspires us and casts a grandiose vision (Declaration of Independence), but then we want a government that can actually get some things done without going too far and taking us out of our comfort zones (Constitution).

The other interesting thing was his agreement with my own observations in class the other day, namely that Americans have this weird love-hate relationship with government and taxes. Perhaps because our Revolution was so steeped in taxation issues, we say "taxes" as if we're referring to STDs. Yet we expect the state to fulfill certain obligations, like war, education, disaster relief, rescuing investment banks... depending on your personal views of what's important. I love Meacham's characterization: "The American relationship with government is so fraught with hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance that it is difficult to discuss with any degree of rationality." Just wait til we get to the Constitution...

An Ideal or Pragmatic Approach?

A hot topic on the campaign trail has been the issue of how to handle ending the war in Iraq, and each candidate seems to take either a pragmatic or ideal position on the issue.

Senator McCain has argued that we should not leave Iraq until we have secured "victory," while Senator Obama has argued that getting involved in Iraq was a mistake all along and that we need to withdraw in a "responsible manner."

One could argue that McCain's answer is an idealist's approach to the issue (victory!) while Obama concedes that mistakes were made and that while we might not be seen as winners, we still need to leave for very good reasons.

But this is just one instance where we see these values (idealism and pragmatism) clash. Where else do you see this conflict in American culture?

Some political road rage?

I was a bit disturbed when reading reports about crowd reactions at McCain events. Not surprisingly, many McCain supporters wanted to see him "fight back" against the Obama campaign. Then other individuals expressed their fear, one saying he was"scared" of an Obama presidency, and another woman saying she couldn't trust him because he's an "Arab". At one point, someone in the crowd yelled "kill him!" Some analysts say no big deal-these political rallies have a tendency to get emotional and passionate, and perhaps bring out sides of us that we wouldn't normally express in public. But isn't this precisely the point? Why is that what we wouldn't say to a person's face in a normal conversation is acceptable at a rally? This underscores the point that people are too easily whipped up into a kind of mob mentality and suspend their rational faculties when they perceive a time of peril. (I think of the hanging scenes in the film version of The Crucible.) Do we really want to excuse this type of public behavior? To his credit, McCain cautioned his followers and expressed respect for his opponent.

I'd like to read some reports regarding if anything similar goes on at Obama rallies, if anyone can find them. Are there people shouting "shoot Palin!" for example?

Guantanamo Update

Check it out:

NY Times article.

The end is near!!!

Did we get your attention? OK, we're not talking about the end of the world, nor are we misquoting The Man-Who-Was-Probably-Lakota from "Res Blues." The "end" we're speaking of is the end of our "Perilous Times" unit.

We'll introduce the essay prompt early this week, but here's a teaser, and an opportunity for pre-writing and accessing some prior knowledge...

What do you know about these three somewhat recent events/topics?
- Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
- Patriot Act II
- The recent bill passed and signed by President Bush this Friday, October 3rd

This isn't a homework assignment we're posting, but if you happen to catch this blog post, give these items some thought.

A little humor during perilous times...

Does the name Carl Linneaus ring a bell? Remember the plant-naming aficionado from Jamaica Kincaid's "In History"?

Well, driving home from work tonight I heard a humorous piece on NPR about Linneaus and the names he came up with for plants. You might find it interesting; here's the link: NPR Radio Piece

Any thoughts on how Kincaid would react to this piece?

"Disastrous" Times?

Is it just me, or does it seem like some governor, mayor, or county board president is declaring a state of emergency in response to some disaster just about every other week these days? Don't get me wrong; I have tremendous sympathy for the victims of the recent hurricanes and the record-setting rains and flooding in the Chicagoland area. But it seems like these "declarations" are happening more and more frequently. Are we living in more "disastrous" times than a few decades ago, or is something else going on here? I wonder if witnessing the failure of government to provide adequate assistance to people who legitimately needed it (i.e. Katrina) has made us extra prone to expecting the government to step in immediately at every crisis. No politician wants to be seen as callous and inept in the face of natural disaster. And now we see huge government bailouts of irresponsible major financial firms because if they failed, it would be a disaster, and everyone would be suffering the consequences of their recklessness. So will this all just feed into a larger expectation that one of government's primary responsibilities is to somehow "rescue" us at every peril?

A Hope Grown in Peril

Here is an audio link from National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" last night.

It tells the non-dominant narrative of those who live in hurricane country. I find it an interesting display of action taken during this perilous time; rather than heeding government and evacuation warnings, the people Johnston describes instead decide to totally ignore their authorities in favor of the hope they hold. This is simply an exposure of another often overlooked school of thought. A bit of culture, if you will. What do you think?