br00ke the cr00k?

Alcohol and drugs have always remained a controversial issue among the people of America, not only because their effects are extreme, but because the government always seems to be a little bit too involved with the decisions that the people make whether to use these substances or not. Many believe that the government’s involvement with drug trafficking is making it even worse and people are rebelling against the government because of it.

“Decades of government efforts to crack down on both the cultivation and consumption of pot have had a counter-productive effect, since even the most conservative government estimates suggest domestic marijuana production has increased tenfold in the past 25 years. It is the leading cash crop in 12 states, and one of the top five crops in 39 states.”

I found this quote on the blog http://americablog.blogspot.com which is a blog that deals with all issues in America, and the posts are made by many different people from all over the world daily on current events.

What is hard to understand is that if the government is cracking down on drugs in America, why is the business suddenly skyrocketing? Immortal Technique, a rapper who mainly talks about current events in America and all over the world, wrote a song called “Peruvian Cocaine”. In his song, he states his opinion on drug trafficking, and says that the government is mainly to blame because the elitists in the country are paying for these drugs and encouraging the drugs.

“Guest: Well, the irony of this, of course, is that
this money, which is in the billions, is coming from
your country. You see, you are the major purchaser of
our national product, which is of course cocaine.

Host: On one hand, you’re saying the United States
government is spending millions of dollars to
eliminate the flow of drugs onto our streets. At the
same time, we are doing business with the very same
goverment that is flooding our streets with cocaine.”

This is the very beginning of the song, and they say was taken from the film, Scarface, but I believe it was changed around a little bit. In this quote, they are stating how our government is not doing that much about the drug trafficking, and in a way, is supporting it, ironically. In the end of the song, Immortal Technique tells someone who has been arrested for cocaine what to say in court.

“I’m not guilty. YOU’RE the one that’s guilty. The
lawmakers, the politicians, the Columbian drug lords,
all you who lobby against making drugs legal. Just
like you did with alcohol during the prohibition.
You’re the one who’s guilty. I mean, c’mon, let’s kick
the ballistics here: Ain’t no Uzi’s made in Harlem.
Not one of us in here owns a poppy field. This thing
is bigger than (Immortal Technique). This is big
business. This is the American way.”

Immortal Technique is bringing up the fact that cocaine is not made in this country, if the government is cracking down on cocaine and the trafficking of drugs, why aren’t they catching any of these drug lords?

As a child in elementary school, whenever there is a fight, teachers will also scold the kids and tell them that they don’t need to show their emotions with their hands, but if they have a problem with eachother, then they should tell eachother. Adults are constantly telling teenagers and kids that fist fights just aren’t worth it, that if they would just sit down and speak to eachother about their problems rationally, then the amount of physical pain could be avoided.

This is the way that many people also feel about the government, and the way that we rushed into the war. Right now, President Bush is in a situation, where he really needs to talk to the people that he is fighting with and do everything that he can to end this war. If in the beginning, before we started the war and sent a large amount of troops to Iraq, President Bush had talked rationally with Israel and other countries surrounding Iraq, then it’s possible that this war could have been avoided and we would not be stuck right now, debating on whether we should pull out or continue fighting.

In a very twisted way, this war is a good example for the youth of America because we are seeing first hand what happens when people do not sit down and speak rationally about their problems and how to go about solving them with out killing or hurting anyone. President Bush is showing all of us how not to run a country, let’s hope our future president is paying close attention.

Thirty years ago, the Vietnam War left a huge hole in the heart of many Americans. President Johnson did not retreat from Vietnam at times when he should have, but felt that if he were to retreat not only would it look bad on America, but it may also make the country even worse.

 Iraq seems to be in the same situation as Vietnam because President Bush feels like if he was to remove troops out of the country, not only would Iraq unfold, but it would embarrass America and make us look bad. Although, this would not be true because we are already embarrassing ourselves by holding our troops in Iraq and because so many of them are dying, it’s making America look like a horrible country that doesn’t care about it’s eighteen year old boys.

In an article on www.watchingamerica.com President Bush says that “Thirty years ago, Vietnam taught us a lesson. …We will not leave Iraq and we’ll succeed unless we quit” (Decuyo). Not leaving Iraq actually does make a lot of sense for the benefit of Iraq, because if we leave, a civil war will either break out or anarchy will occur. All of this brings us back to the point that we should have never gotten involved in Iraq in the first place. The damage seems to have already been done, and there’s not much else that we can do but carefully tread on the path that we believe is the right one and that will lead us to the end of this war without hurting too many people along the way.

The wealth gap has played a major role in our society for as long as our society has been on the continent of North America. Writers and historians have studied it for hundreds of years, and still, it is hard to understand the psychology of why people believe that they are superior to another human.

The wealth gap between blacks and whites started a long time ago, when the blacks were brought over and sold in to slavery. This was the start of the wealth gap, even though blacks weren’t even considered people, it was the catalyst for the major wealth gap that now exists. Once slavery ended, the wealth gap was clearly visible, whites did everything they could do to not allow the blacks to become more successful than them. There was not much that the blacks could do to fight back, they hadn’t been in the country as long, and they hadn’t had power for as long as the whites had, there weren’t many people who would speak up for them. This lead to an overwhelming weatlh gap, where the blacks were still working in the fields and the whites still the plantation owners, but now with “paid” workers, not slaves.

Even today, blacks are still a minority, and there is still a prominent wealth gap in our society. It is more common for a black family to live in a lower middle class neighborhood, rather than a white family to live in one. It is less likely for a black family to live in a nice suburb, rather than a white family.

At upper income levels (greater than $75,000 per year), white families have a median net worth of $308,000, almost three times the figure for upper-income African-American families ($114,600) (Conley 1)

Contemporary society is responsible for this wealth gap because of the prominent white upper class, also known by some as the “elitists” who many believe, control the government. These people, whether they know it or not (most do know and purposely do this) only allow their money to go to other rich whites. This is mainly why university is so expensive and why many poor minorities cannot go to college, because the prices are so high. This upper middle class is a terrible thing to have because it blocks out other peoples opportunities, like blacks. It works like a window screen, when the whites don’t want something, they just filter it out with a blockade. This gap is a dangerous thing to have, because we are all made equal and we need to treat eachother that way.

The only thing that can be done is for the minorities that are being cornered in a way, to keep pushing and to get themselves out of this mess. There is nothing else to do but to keep fighting and to let their voices be heard, because people have consciences. If they scream loud enough, someone is bound to hear them.

The GI Bill or Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, was made during WWII to play as an incentive for young men to join the Army and become soldiers. This paid for a lot of their life, the GI Bill, it paid for their educationafter the war, helped with family problems, and also helped with insurance, they were also given a type of salary to fight. The GI Bill, once put into play, suddenly was geared to those in the lower classes, because it helped them through school. The same seems to be true for the soldiers today, whom are mainly of lower classes and minorities.

The current GI Bill is not nearly as substantial today as it was back in the 1940’s and 1950’s. In fact, the soldiers are still paid the same amount now as they were when the bill was first passed. Clearly, money is a lot different now, and the salary that they are paid does not make sure that they are set for life, especially if they have a family, it is only around $10,000.

The GI Bill when it was first put into play in the United States during/after World War II helped whites much more than it helped blacks. The Bill was meant to not help blacks nearly as much as it helped whites, and it was clearly obvious, even though no where in the bill did it say that, it was only interpreted that way by the government and those who issued loans and money.

Not only did blacks face discrimination once they returned home after the war, the poverty that most blacks faced during the 1940s and 1950s represented another hurdle in their path to utilizing the benefits of the G.I. Bill because it made it problematic for them to seek an education when labor and income were needed at home. The United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), because of its strong affiliation to the all-white American Legion and VFW, also became a formidable foe to many blacks in search of an education because it had the power to deny or grant the claims of black G.I.s. Additionally, banks and mortgage agencies refused loans to blacks, making the G.I. Bill even less effective for them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_and_the_G.I._Bill

Now, times have changed and tables have turned and the GI Bill is geared more towards poor neighborhoods because it gives them more of an incentive to join, knowing that they can get off the streets if they join, and helps them pay for school after the war.

Just because our pop culture today is much more risque than it was in the fifties, does not mean that all of it is negatively impacting our young society today. There are tv shows that may have seemed risque in the fifties, but today, they are postively impacting teenagers, like the tv show, CSI. CSI follows a team of crime scene investigators in Las Vegas and adds more drama to their lives to make the ratings go up.

 This is one of the most popular shows on television, and no part of it could possibly put the wrong idea in any teen’s head.

The show averages 30 million viewers every week and as of February 2006, CBS reported that over 90 million viewers have tuned into the series this past year alone.

CSI influences teenagers to become policemen and women and to pay attention in chemistry class if they like the show at all, because really, all people do in forensics labs is chemistry. This is a much better idea to show a teenager than to have them play GTA: Vice City because then they want to do something with their lives, even if it does have to do with blood and gore and crime, but they’re helping the crime, not committing it.

This show would have definitely been risque in the fifties because they show the aftermath of rape and murder, but the positive part of the show is that they are helping to solve the crime. This is the problem with television in the fifties, they never showed the real world and because of that, all of the people at home felt that they needed to be like the people on television, and because they weren’t, there were problems at home.

The picture above shows a scene from GTA: Vice City. I know that video games and how they’ve affected teenagers today has already been discussed. Although, I’m not quite sure that teenagers have ever really discussed it, it seems as if the only people talking about it were over the age of thirty. I’ve played GTA: Vice City, in fact, I own the game, and I think it’s actually a lot of fun to play, especially with friends.

Once someone has played the game for a couple minutes, they start to see everything that is thought to be inappropriate for teenagers. Not only inappropriate, but degrading towards women. It was a little weird for me, as a girl, to be playing the game and then have to meet a prostitute, rustle around in a bush with her, and then kill her for her money. Not something that I really want to think about, let alone do in a video game that seems to be very real, especially with graphics today.

When the media starts allowing kids to believe that this is what a gangsters life is like, kids start believing and wanting to replicate it. Not only are they believing the game, but they are believing the life and may begin to start to live by what they do in the game.

I found this quote on the website “wikinews”: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_under_fire

The Grand Theft Auto (G.T.A.) game series, based on the underworld, pushes social limits on violence and sexual content in the video gaming industry. The newer Grand Theft Auto 3 release sparked controversy when it came to light the plot was based on an unnamed character’s mission to destroy and slaughter his way to the top of the local crime scene.

Now, I say this because it seems as if this is happening in the real world. Although, the only people who it seems have ever talked about this are the adults, the parents of the kids who have committed violent crimes that they believe is because the child had played the game, continuously. Not once did someone hear the kid talk about the video game, so it seems as if the parents are talking a little too much and maybe not letting the kids explain why they committed the crime, I’m sure that all of the kids would agree that they didn’t commit the crime only because of the game, and that’s what they learned. The adults need to let the children/teens speak more openly about the media today and what they believe needs to be blocked and what doesn’t need to be blocked.

 ”Least Objectionable Programming” in my idea is all a lie. I don’t believe that there is such thing as “least objectionable programming”, how can you deny life and what comes with it? How can you let someone tell you what is risque and what is not risque? These questions are the same questions writers have been asking themselves since the 1950’s, writers like Stephanie Coontz.

The happy, homogeneous families that we “remember” from the 1950s were thus partly a result of the media’s denial of diversity. But even among sectors of the population where the “least objectionable” families did prevail, their values and behaviors were not entirely a spontaneous, joyful reaction to prosperity.

Definitely I believe that the television today is much preferable to the television in the 50’s. Now, television is not as censored and the people are shown more of the real world, not some fake world that the government wants them to live in. Film is a type of freedom of speech, and that is something that the government has no right to take from the people.

Although, playing the devil’s advocate I can see how the government would believe that some popular culture could be dangerous to today’s society. For example, some kids after they watch Scarface, believe that that is what they want to do in life and some movies and shows do influence kids. This is where education comes in, it is the adults and parents job to educate their children by telling them that television is not real life and usually, characters are not usually something to aspire to be.

The real world is something that no one can actually hide. So why even try?

Through the best of times,
Through the worst of times,
Through Nixon and through Bush,
Do you remember ‘36?
We went our seperate ways.
You fought for Stalin.
I fought for freedom.
You believe in authority.
I believe in myself.
I’m a molotov cocktail.
You’re Dom Perignon.
Baby, what’s that confused look in your eyes?
What I’m trying to say is that
I burn down buildings
While you sit on a shelf inside of them.
You call the cops
On the looters and piethrowers.
They call it class war,
I call it co-conspirators.

‘Cause baby, I’m an anarchist,
You’re a spineless liberal.
We marched together for the eight-hour day
And held hands in the streets of Seattle,
But when it came time to throw bricks
Through that Starbucks window,
You left me all alone.

You watched in awe at the red,
White, and blue on the fourth of july.
While those fireworks were exploding,
I was burning that dfawejfoea
And stringing my black flag high,
Eating the peanuts
That the parties have tossed you
In the back seat of your father’s new Ford.
You believe in the ballot,
Believe in reform.
You have faith in the elephant and jackass,
And to you, solidarity’s a four-letter word.
We’re all hypocrites,
But you’re a patriot.
You thought I was only joking
When I screamed “Kill Whitey!”
At the top of my lungs
At the cops in their cars
And the men in their suits.
No, I won’t take your hand
And marry the State.

 I realize that this song does not talk much about what we are studying, but it does talk about the rights of the people, and the peoples ideas. I do not agree with anarchism because I feel that whenever a country does not have a controlled government, a dictatorship, similar to Hitler, will or would arise. The only part of anarchism that I do admire is an anarchists dedication to what they believe in. True anarchists have studied the idea for years and researched probably more about the politicians than the polticians know about themselves.

 Plus, I just think that this song is bangin’. Download it if you want and check out some more of their stuff, they are all political activists: Against Me! is their name.

P.S. The name of the song is “Baby, I’m An Anarchist!”

Ciao!

After reading Dan’s post about talking with his parents at dinner about Guantanamo Bay and Japanese Internment and if they were related or not, I decided that I, for the most part, agree with Dan.

Dan makes complete sense when he says that the government is tiptoeing around so as to be politically correct and still be able to punsih the bad people for all of the wrongs they have committed.

If people are threatening our safety, we need to detain them and put them at risk so as to prevent them from harming us.

I definitely agree with this, because that is the point of our government, our government is here to protect the people and by putting away these men who are hurting our people, we are helping our country and doing our job.

  I beleive that as long as we have reason to do this and aslong as those whom are detained are being treated well, and not abused, we have every right to continue this process untill all suspects can be released without risk to the american people. 

This is the one part of Dan’s post that I absolutely do not agree with. This is because we all know that the President Bush made the decision to not give the prisoners their full rights. Therefore, it is very possible that those who are being detained are not being treated well and are not being given their chance to a full and fair trial. Going along with what Dan said in his post, if all of this mistreatment is actually occuring, then we, the American people, do not have every right to continue this process.