By: Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart
In this Essay, both Norris and Inglehart argue that Samuel Huntington was wrong on his views about why the Western and Muslim worlds clash. Huntington believed that it was due to the differences in government systems and because the Muslims do no believe in the Democratic system that is used by the U.S. government. This essay states otherwise, they say that there has been surveys done that ask many different countries about their thoughts of the democratic system and even predominantly Muslim countries agreed with the democratic system and believed that it would help their country. This does nothing for Huntington's case. Although they do believe that there is a clash they believe that it is in the traditionally of sexuality. In the Muslim culture they are staying very conservative as the generations persist but in the western cultures the younger generations are becoming more and more liberal. In the United States the younger generations are much more accepting about women being involved in jobs outside the home and much more OK with homosexuality than younger generations in Muslim societies.
This seems like a very logical explanation for our separation. Although this may be part of the fact why our societies collide so much, I feel as though this can not be the only reason for the attack of 9/11. They may not agree with the way we do things but it can not only be the difference in the way we treat women. This difference may keep them from choosing to go with a democratic system but I find it hard to believe that it would persuade some one to kill so many. It is true that the younger generations in America are becoming continuously more liberal and yet the Muslim generations stay conservative. This all just seems so strange that two different countries could have such different views on how to treat sexuality and equality. Although I guess if they feel as strongly about not allowing women to have jobs outside the home as we do about allowing women to have the same rights as men, they may feel like it is time for them to step in. They may feel as though it is time to "change" us. I have no idea who is right on this matter or if it even really does have to do with the women or if it just has to do with the fact that our values are so different. Either way, there is a dispute and it needs to be resolved in some way or another.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Cultural Baggage
By: Barbara Ehrenreich
Barbara Ehrenreich was worried about her past, well not only her past but her families history. She wanted to know where she came from, she wanted to know what types of traditions had been passed down throughout her family history. she wanted to learn about where she came from. She spent much of her life trying to figure this out and trying to learn about traditions that had once been shared with her family. She even tried to start traditions with her children and start believes that were non existent. Her children knew that she was only trying to force these ideas upon them and that she didn't honestly believe what she was saying. She finally learned that it isn't what she got from her family, but the things that were new and changing that was the tradition of her family. The tradition of her family was try something new, to ask questions, and to learn from the new.
This seems like a very legitimate family tradition. Although it took her a while to become secure about what her family history is she finally learned that it was ok to do new things. She realized that it is ok to change what you do and not follow what other people tell you to do. Although I love traditions and I love doing the same thing every Christmas and Thanksgiving I also have no idea where these traditions came from. We do not have any traditions in my family that date back to past centuries, we don't eat any traditional food that came from one of my ancestors home land and we don't talk about all the different cultures that are mixed up into my family. I know that I am French and German but besides that I have no idea where I am from. My mom always just tells me, "your everything white mixed together." This tells me nothing, I know nothing about the people before me. This is why i can relate to Ehrenreich so well. It makes so much sense that following new ways and making my own decisions and not just doing things because thats the way it's always been done is a good way to live.
Barbara Ehrenreich was worried about her past, well not only her past but her families history. She wanted to know where she came from, she wanted to know what types of traditions had been passed down throughout her family history. she wanted to learn about where she came from. She spent much of her life trying to figure this out and trying to learn about traditions that had once been shared with her family. She even tried to start traditions with her children and start believes that were non existent. Her children knew that she was only trying to force these ideas upon them and that she didn't honestly believe what she was saying. She finally learned that it isn't what she got from her family, but the things that were new and changing that was the tradition of her family. The tradition of her family was try something new, to ask questions, and to learn from the new.
This seems like a very legitimate family tradition. Although it took her a while to become secure about what her family history is she finally learned that it was ok to do new things. She realized that it is ok to change what you do and not follow what other people tell you to do. Although I love traditions and I love doing the same thing every Christmas and Thanksgiving I also have no idea where these traditions came from. We do not have any traditions in my family that date back to past centuries, we don't eat any traditional food that came from one of my ancestors home land and we don't talk about all the different cultures that are mixed up into my family. I know that I am French and German but besides that I have no idea where I am from. My mom always just tells me, "your everything white mixed together." This tells me nothing, I know nothing about the people before me. This is why i can relate to Ehrenreich so well. It makes so much sense that following new ways and making my own decisions and not just doing things because thats the way it's always been done is a good way to live.
Fear Not Globalization
By: Joseph S. Nye Jr.
Joseph S. Nye Jr. is much against the people who protest against globalization. He debates that although many similarities have resulted in many countries over the years it is not the United States fault, nor is it because of us that the worlds of today have many similarities. He debates that although there is a correlation this does not mean there is causation. He points out that there are many cultural differences among these countries, it is that many only see the similarities. Yes there are large industries and cities, but this is only due to the mere fact that our world is evolving and revolutionizing. This is not because the United States is changing other countries. Nye argues that what if some other country had developed the computers and Internet, it still would have spread to other countries, other countries still would have developed into technological worlds.
Before reading this work it is asked "is globalization a force for good or bad? will it turn all nations, cultures, and peoples into reflections of each other?" I believe that no, everyone is keeping their own historical backgrounds and every country has their own culture and different ways of doing things. It seems as though every country has a McDonald's and yet at every McDonald's in different countries, different things are served. This may be minor and yet it means every culture is keeping their uniqueness. although every country may be revolutionizing it does not mean that we are becoming one mesh. The United States may mesh all of the cultures together but in many cases it is encouraged that we keep our traditions and our cultures alive so that not only can we be united but we can also teach us our own ways. Even if the world is globalizing it is not bad to learn from other countries achievements and mishaps. Although we are keeping our own culture and sharing new ideas and creations this does not mean that the United States needs to be blaimed or have fingers pointed at them for any negative that may come out of this. Every country is only educating other countries about their world and their ways.
Joseph S. Nye Jr. is much against the people who protest against globalization. He debates that although many similarities have resulted in many countries over the years it is not the United States fault, nor is it because of us that the worlds of today have many similarities. He debates that although there is a correlation this does not mean there is causation. He points out that there are many cultural differences among these countries, it is that many only see the similarities. Yes there are large industries and cities, but this is only due to the mere fact that our world is evolving and revolutionizing. This is not because the United States is changing other countries. Nye argues that what if some other country had developed the computers and Internet, it still would have spread to other countries, other countries still would have developed into technological worlds.
Before reading this work it is asked "is globalization a force for good or bad? will it turn all nations, cultures, and peoples into reflections of each other?" I believe that no, everyone is keeping their own historical backgrounds and every country has their own culture and different ways of doing things. It seems as though every country has a McDonald's and yet at every McDonald's in different countries, different things are served. This may be minor and yet it means every culture is keeping their uniqueness. although every country may be revolutionizing it does not mean that we are becoming one mesh. The United States may mesh all of the cultures together but in many cases it is encouraged that we keep our traditions and our cultures alive so that not only can we be united but we can also teach us our own ways. Even if the world is globalizing it is not bad to learn from other countries achievements and mishaps. Although we are keeping our own culture and sharing new ideas and creations this does not mean that the United States needs to be blaimed or have fingers pointed at them for any negative that may come out of this. Every country is only educating other countries about their world and their ways.
Mute in an English- Only World
By: Chang-Rae Lee
Chang-Rae Lee tells a story about her child hood to depict the challenges that many people from other countries face everyday. She tells a story about her mother and the struggle she had to deal with to even talk to the butcher at the market. Lee was only 6 or 7 when her mother would take her shopping with her in hopes that she would be able to help with the communication barrier. Her mother would practice her English, watch TV, and carry a book around that would help with her English. None of this seemed to help, due to the fact that her mother spent most days inside tending to the children, not being able to practice her English skills with a fluent English speaker. Lee picked up on the Language much quicker because she was young and in school, her father also because he spent many days at work speaking in English. Although it took her mother many years of practice and embarrassment to learn English, she never did learn it to the point where she could express emotions while speaking English.
Chang-Rae Lee was trying to illistrate the difficulties that many have with the English language when the travel here from other countries. Although she understands the fact that many were upset about the only Korean signs, she hoped that they would understand why a Korean may want signs in their native language. As I read this story I felt sorry for Lee's mother. I felt as though she tried, and yet there was nothing that she could do. I think this was Lee's point. She wanted people to stop with the, "your in our country learn our language" saying that you here so often. This is no ones country, we have all traveled here from different parts of the world and Lee wanted people to recognize that even though English is the most dominant language in the United States there are people here from many different native tongues and it would be helpful to post signs in many different languages. I'm sure that Lee's mother is not the only person that never mastered the English language befored she died and I'm sure she will not be the last. We do not have to abandoned the English language we only need to be more understanding and helpful with those who may not yet understand the language.
Chang-Rae Lee tells a story about her child hood to depict the challenges that many people from other countries face everyday. She tells a story about her mother and the struggle she had to deal with to even talk to the butcher at the market. Lee was only 6 or 7 when her mother would take her shopping with her in hopes that she would be able to help with the communication barrier. Her mother would practice her English, watch TV, and carry a book around that would help with her English. None of this seemed to help, due to the fact that her mother spent most days inside tending to the children, not being able to practice her English skills with a fluent English speaker. Lee picked up on the Language much quicker because she was young and in school, her father also because he spent many days at work speaking in English. Although it took her mother many years of practice and embarrassment to learn English, she never did learn it to the point where she could express emotions while speaking English.
Chang-Rae Lee was trying to illistrate the difficulties that many have with the English language when the travel here from other countries. Although she understands the fact that many were upset about the only Korean signs, she hoped that they would understand why a Korean may want signs in their native language. As I read this story I felt sorry for Lee's mother. I felt as though she tried, and yet there was nothing that she could do. I think this was Lee's point. She wanted people to stop with the, "your in our country learn our language" saying that you here so often. This is no ones country, we have all traveled here from different parts of the world and Lee wanted people to recognize that even though English is the most dominant language in the United States there are people here from many different native tongues and it would be helpful to post signs in many different languages. I'm sure that Lee's mother is not the only person that never mastered the English language befored she died and I'm sure she will not be the last. We do not have to abandoned the English language we only need to be more understanding and helpful with those who may not yet understand the language.
America: The Multinational Society
by: Ishmael Reed
Ishmael Reed discusses the fact that many cultures influence the United States more than any one percieves in their everyday life. He gives examples such as the fact that in a Texas airport both English and Spanish language was used to instruct people about where to go. He talked about how one man told him of Detroit and all the differences that lie there. Any from mosques made by Islamic people to Hispanic people. He talked of the paintings in the McDonalds's Restaurant that had been drawn by Afro-Americans. Reed does not believe in this "Western Civilization" instead he believes that this a mixture of many different cultures coming together. He discusses the fact that people have been coming here since the discovery of the United States and has been influencing our culture ever since. He argues that it is being fought that even our government system may not have even come from European government systems but instead from the Native Americans that were originally here.
Ishmael Reeds arguments seem more valid than any other argument I have ever read about the fact that the United States in Westernizing the rest of the world. Instead we are being influenced each and every day by every new comer that steps over that border. Each and everyday we are seeing new styles of clothing, of art work, or even music. Some may be due to the fact that we have so many different cultures in one country working together. Others are just the mere fact that new culture is being brought to us every day. Now with the ease of discovering new culture through the Internet it is much easier to share ideas and become the largely diverse country that we are. Every since the United States was founded new people from new countries have been coming to the Americas and influencing every day life and habits. This only seems fair to not blaim the United States for "Westernizing" culture in other countries, but aplaud the United States for being able to bring all of these different cultures together. There are many days where I see something that may be influenced by another country that I do not even recognize that it is influenced by another country. Like Reed mentioned about the Mosque in Detroit, I have seen a Mosque many times before and never thought anything of it being made by people that were not originally from here. If you think about all of our histories, all of our family backgrounds, there are very limited amount of people that can honestly say they cannot trace their family back to a time when they were not in America. This tells us that not only are we influencing other countries but other countries are influencing us more than we know.
Ishmael Reed discusses the fact that many cultures influence the United States more than any one percieves in their everyday life. He gives examples such as the fact that in a Texas airport both English and Spanish language was used to instruct people about where to go. He talked about how one man told him of Detroit and all the differences that lie there. Any from mosques made by Islamic people to Hispanic people. He talked of the paintings in the McDonalds's Restaurant that had been drawn by Afro-Americans. Reed does not believe in this "Western Civilization" instead he believes that this a mixture of many different cultures coming together. He discusses the fact that people have been coming here since the discovery of the United States and has been influencing our culture ever since. He argues that it is being fought that even our government system may not have even come from European government systems but instead from the Native Americans that were originally here.
Ishmael Reeds arguments seem more valid than any other argument I have ever read about the fact that the United States in Westernizing the rest of the world. Instead we are being influenced each and every day by every new comer that steps over that border. Each and everyday we are seeing new styles of clothing, of art work, or even music. Some may be due to the fact that we have so many different cultures in one country working together. Others are just the mere fact that new culture is being brought to us every day. Now with the ease of discovering new culture through the Internet it is much easier to share ideas and become the largely diverse country that we are. Every since the United States was founded new people from new countries have been coming to the Americas and influencing every day life and habits. This only seems fair to not blaim the United States for "Westernizing" culture in other countries, but aplaud the United States for being able to bring all of these different cultures together. There are many days where I see something that may be influenced by another country that I do not even recognize that it is influenced by another country. Like Reed mentioned about the Mosque in Detroit, I have seen a Mosque many times before and never thought anything of it being made by people that were not originally from here. If you think about all of our histories, all of our family backgrounds, there are very limited amount of people that can honestly say they cannot trace their family back to a time when they were not in America. This tells us that not only are we influencing other countries but other countries are influencing us more than we know.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Nutrition Facts in Restaurants
The average American eats approximately 4.2 meals out of the house each week. According to a National Restaurant Association Report this has risen in the recent years, from 3.7 meals per person to this extreme new high (Ebbin 1). Although the number of people that eat out and the amount of money that is spent out to eat has gone up, the nutritional information on items has not improved. In 1990 the National Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) was passed which forced store bought packaged items to have nutritional labeling. Now that many more people are eating out of the house, it has become more critical that people are informed about what they are eating. The obesity rate has gone up in the United States and may be attributed to the ignorance of what the population is eating. Many are unaware of how much calories, sodium, and cholesterol are in the food items that they are consuming. The first step to change is by educating others. Let’s educate our population about what they are eating and how these foods influence our health by labeling not only the food we eat inside our homes, but also the foods we consume when eating out is most convenient.
It has been almost 20 years since the NLEA was passed which made it required that all nutrition facts be labeled on in-store food items according to the FDA (Kurtzweil 5). Since then there have been slight improvements in the system which have required restaurants to make some changes. Improvements to the NLEA began in January of 1993 by including restaurants in the National Labeling and Education Act. Although this was improvement, according to the FDA the menus were exempt from this policy. By 1996 it was still not settled on how the restaurants were to follow these regulations. It was decided by August that the restaurants must provide nutritional information for menu items and that health claims must be regulated (Kurtzweil 5). Although the restaurants were required to provide the information, it is still not mandatory in most states to put this information directly on the menu. In fact by 2003 The Center for Science in the Public Interest was claiming that 2/3 of major restaurants were without nutritional information and the ones that did only had “hard to find, hard to read posters or brochures, or inconvenient websites”(Put 2). As of recently it has been passed in California, New York City and Seattle that calorie counts must be provided on menus and menu boards which will hopefully only push other states do to the same, if not more (California 1). Now, more than ever, it has become crucial that nutritional labeling be directly on menus, providing consumers with more information about what they are eating.
The only questioned posed is would this help our country and its obesity crisis. It has been stated by Chancey in the QSR magazine that The Trust for America’s Health (TFAH) has found that the adult obesity rate has risen in 37 states in the past year and not a single state lowered their obesity rate (Chancey 1). Passing a bill to include Nutritional information could do no harm to the health of our population; in fact it could only help this ever-expanding obesity rate. Even Dr. Hendrich states with enthusiasm, “I can’t see any downside to the addition” (hendrich 1). Many already want healthier options but are just unaware of how to find these options available to them. Kurtzweil, a reporter for the FDA, says that more than half of people over the age of 35 and 2 out 5 18 to 34 year olds look for healthier items on menu’s when eating out (Kurtzweil). This would be made much easier if the exact amount of calories and other beneficial information were listed directly on the menu. This may lead to an increase in awareness and an increase in the amount of people that look for these nutritional substitutes when dining out. In fact labeling in stores has been studied and is claimed to help detour people from buying foods that may not be as healthy. Barbra Bruemmer, an epidemiologist in grocery stores claims that 80% of people state that they use/look at the labels on food and 50% of people say that they may put something down after reading the label (Hochberg 3). On top of this there are many who need the nutritional facts due to health concerns that have already been labeled a problem. Such as diabetes and high cholesterol it is important for these people to be provided the information necessary for them to stay healthy. This would include information such as salt content, calorie content and even cholesterol content. Lori Brown states “It’s like Russian roulette, because you don’t know exactly how much is in each dish, how much fat grams, how many carbs for him” this makes it impossible to decide what to eat when dining out (Hochberg 1).
It is evident that life styles in the United States have changed drastically. People spend more time on the go, on the computer, running kids around, and eating out with increased portion sizes. In fact according to the National Restaurant Association, Americans spent 44% of their food dollars outside of the house in 1996 which was up from 1955 by 25% (Kurtzweil 1). Not only has the amount of money spent out to eat increased the amount of food served has increased as well. Levi from the QSR magazine supports the labeling due to the fact that “the No. 1 offender in the food industry is large portion sizes” (Chancey 1). Dr. Hendrich also agrees that knowing this information could help judge how much of the meal to actually consume. For these reason, it is necessary that all menus have their information posted directly on the menu. It is inconvenient to have to go online or ask for a special pamphlet with the nutritional facts on them. We live in a world of convenience, why not make it convenient to be healthy?
If you would like to support this cause by helping pass the bill that will make restaurants put nutritional facts on their menus there are many things that you can do. First of all you can join support groups and sign petitions. One of the best ways to get involved and to influence the outcome of this bill is to right to your senator. There are many websites that give you advice on how to right to your senator about the issue including http://takeaction.cspinet.org/cspi/alert-description.html?alert_id=2122797. This campaign was started in 2003 and will give you advice on what to say in a letter to your governor and how to go about doing so.
The smart idea would be to put nutrition facts on menus in restaurants. This would make it much more convenient for people to be health aware and may detour people from eating things that may not be as healthy or beneficial as another option that may be on the menu. It may also help with people that have diseases that have been diagnosed, or maybe even help to prevent diseases that could be diagnosed. It would benefit mothers in that it would make it much easier for them to decide what to feed their children. If they realize that a Mc Donalds milk shake has more calories than a big mac or than 2 egg mc muffins they may think twice about allowing their child to eat the whole thing. Go to the website listed above, write to your senator, and let’s make our country aware of what they are eating in the most convenient way possible.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Two America's?
The essay, Two America's, by Joseph Contreras is about the Hispanic population in the United States and the blending of the cultures or the lack there of.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
