For this blog post i have chosen write about the cultural clash of american food. When people see or hear classics like hot dog or hamburger they are instantly reminded of traditional american scenes but the truth is that there origins are mostly from the early history of immigration. Many foods that have become associated with the states are mostly from European nations e.g. pizza, Italy. America has popularised a humongous number of fast food restaurants for example, Taco Bell, Dominos, and Papa Johns.
AM1111 2014 DH blog 2
Thursday, 11 December 2014
Police Brutality: Public Opinion
The American public seem to be split on issues of Police brutality. This is not only between people of same color, in difference of views, but an ethnic divide is more than visible on these issues. It seems that white Americans feel more protected by their Police force than Black citizens. Below is a link to a youtube video that shows Police brutality.
This video went absolutely viral in the states and even reached the United Kingdom. It seems to show how passionately American citizens feel about the issues surrounding Police brutality. Again support for this video seemed to come mainly from the African American community, but did gain white support.
However it must be shown that in recent years American police have been purposely shown in bad light in the American press which may add to the negative view. People only care about issues when they are all over the news (EBOLA). So the negative headlines in the news do not help the Police forces reputation.
Breaking the Colour Barrier in Sports

In 1947, Jackie Robinson became the first Black man in History to play Major League Baseball. Before the Brooklyn Dodgers signed him from the Kansas City Monarchs, of the Negro League. Breaking down the colour wall was GM of the Dodgers Branch Rickey. Branch Rickey was an innovator when it came to breaking the colour barrier and, rather predictably, faced a lot of opposition from people around the league. While he knew that Robinson would face racism in the major leagues, Rickey knew that it had to happen to win in Baseball.
However, Jackie was not the first Black athlete to play in a major American league. In 1946, Bill Willis became one of the first Black athletes to play in the NFL. Along with Willis, Marion Motley, Kenny Washington (the first to sign a contract with an NFL team) and Woody Strode also signed to the league in 1946, breaking down the colour barrier in the NFL.In 1950, the colour barrier was broken in the NBA. Chuck Cooper, Earl Lloyd and Nat 'Sweetwater' Clifton (the first to sign a contract with a team) were signed to teams in the NBA. Breaking the final barrier in the 'Major' American leagues.
Perhaps though, Jackie Robinson is the best known of those that broke the barrier. This is probably because he was the only true one of these players that became a success on their respective leagues. Or at least, had the most success. Nat Clifton had some success in the NBA for the New York Knicks, becoming an all-star in 1957. But Jackie Robinson was voted the rookie of the year, as well as winning the Major league championship and becoming a multi time all star. He has gone down as one of the best to ever play the game, not just known for breaking the colour barrier, but for being a great success in the league.
I feel this is an important area to study in the course because it has played such a large part in the history of the American sports they played in. Its also a major part in the civil rights movement. Although they all faced blatant and expected racism, they persevered and won through. While some of their careers were short, the impact and significance of them were major and changed the face of sports. By being on the major stage they may have helped people accept them more, creating sympathy among many that didn't have sympathy before. By playing for major teams they were likely on teams that were cheered for and may have been cheered for themselves by White people. Which was a major thing in the 1940's and 50's.
Soccer in America
American sports always have a 'winner' and a 'loser' if the game is tied, the game goes into 'over time' and there will be a winner. This could be down to ideology. The Americans like to see someone coming out on top, they are a society build around 'winners' as the American dream states. If the underdog in England for instance gains a draw against the Might Might Man United ( Maybe not so much now but back in the day) they are hailed. But in America they would want to see that team be able to go one better and win or lose trying.
Americas top leagues are comprised of teams that are constantly changing. The Super bowl is never/rarely won by the same team, it is rare that the same teams are in the semi-finals. But in Europe, there are only 2-3 teams in each major league that can realistically win the league. In England, there was the 'Big 4' that included the 4 teams (Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and Manchester United) that were seen to dominate every competition. This also happens in the US. LA Galaxy have won 3 of the last 5 MLS cups. This predictability leads could lead Americans to lose interest, knowing that their team may not be able to complete in the next tournament the opposite to the tradition American sports where the weaker teams can strengthen ( Only really in the NFL)
It is true that the American interest in Soccer has increased. however, it is most popular in areas of mass immigration. The teams are based mostly on the west and east coast, immigrants from Mexico and Europe are the ones who follow Soccer like the average American follow Football or Baseball. The USA's success in the 2014 FIFA World cup united Americans to support their nation, however games haven't hit the same viewing heights.
Chelsea FC stadium Stamford bridge.
Seattle Sounders CenturyLink field stadium
The Chelsea vs Sounders game in the US attracted over 60,000 fans, 17,000 more than the capacity at Stamford bridge.
I believe it would have been interesting/beneficial to look at American sports in this topic as it give us a look at how the original American values have made their way into american society.
Wednesday, 10 December 2014
Ideology In Sport
For this weeks blog post for things we haven't covered I have chosen to talk and write about how one of America favorite past times is completely based on a system which is seen as anti-American. This video high lights the almost comical irony of the NFL showing how Communism can actually be a force for good whilst mostly depicting American football as the "will of the American people". Where as baseball is based on capitalism, shown by the weak get weaker and the winning teams get the best picks which keeps them on the winning streak. Also Merry Christmas :)
Thursday, 4 December 2014
Ferguson Riots and America
Mike Brown and His effect on the rest of America
Since the shooting of Mike Brown by officer Darren Wilson massive riots and calls for justice have sprung from the largely African American populated Ferguson, Missouri. Many believe this is just another account of white supremacy in the police force of America victimizing black people for being black, even more see Mike Brown now as a martyr as he has died for their cause of diminishing the divide of race some say that is still very present in modern times. Unfortunately all this has caused has been massive riots we see on T.V. burning houses, destroying squad cars and ruining small business owned by either white or black business men who have been guilty of nothing but their location.
Since the shooting of Mike Brown by officer Darren Wilson massive riots and calls for justice have sprung from the largely African American populated Ferguson, Missouri. Many believe this is just another account of white supremacy in the police force of America victimizing black people for being black, even more see Mike Brown now as a martyr as he has died for their cause of diminishing the divide of race some say that is still very present in modern times. Unfortunately all this has caused has been massive riots we see on T.V. burning houses, destroying squad cars and ruining small business owned by either white or black business men who have been guilty of nothing but their location.
This has now proved that it is almost impossible for police officers to do their job, with rioters and the media targeting the police force by damaging their reputation for shooting someone that posed a serious threat to the people around him. They have been forced to use strict force to break up the looters damaging their position even more, it has meant that Ferguson police force is damned if they damned if they don't. There is nothing they can do which fill restore faith in the justice system as this time.
It also seems strange that protesters/looters have taken Mike Brown for the face of their campaign as unlike other shootings which have been proved to based on race e.g. this man is guilty for the crimes he committed, it is clearly seen on surveillance footage, by autopsy reports and eye witnesses. It seems they have chosen a violent man to represent a very violent protest.
Mike Brown Surveillance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHxXGvXQrno
Media Handling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=761sl8f1zwg
Interview with Officer Darren Wilson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9GTU1glZAc
How Hard It's Become For Officers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7MAO7McNKE&feature=youtu.be
Current Global Struggles. USA
The group say that there is no solution that American leadership can offer.
They think that America are taking the wrong actions in dealing with the issues in Syria. They think that it is no business of Americans to get involved in middle eastern affairs. They completely shut down other peoples ideas by saying that anyone who says otherwise is simply wrong. they stand up against the common American belief and question whether what the government is doing is right.
They criticise the American government saying that they are only making a bad situation worse and are sticking their noses in business that does not concern them. They stand against the idea of bombing Syria and speak out to Obama to STOP. CREDO would urge a no vote on military intervention in Iraq and Syria as currently understood.
This shows that even though the majority of America (and myself) are on the side of the government in the war on terror, there are people, Americans, that believe the USA are sticking their nose into a door that doesn't need to be open.
They also criticise the military leadership in America. Saying that the military establishment and key members of the Obama administration including John Kerry and Joe Biden who are beating the drums for war. They say that America is asking for war, but don't blame the president alone. They question not only the political leadership of America but its Military as well. They believe that Global issues are only being made worse by western intervention, making America look very bad.
They don't argue against protecting the civilians but against the unnecessary bombing of Syria. Don’t bomb Syria.This group criticise America for the unnecessary bombings that followed. This is a very negative outlook on a situation that most Americans would back in the current day. CREDO are very critical of American decisions, saying they are the wrong ones to make.
They also criticise American decisions to Arm the rebels, saying it will only make the situation worse. Again this is a very critical view of America and global issues, suggesting that they are trying to cause war rather than prevent it.
They see it as their duty to say this to the president. To show him what he is doing wrong, they even finish the article by saying We have to speak out now to prevent the United States from being dragged down the slippery slope to another unwinnable war in the Middle East. They are very negative about American approach to this conflict, saying that America are not only dragging Syria down but themselves down as well.
Wednesday, 3 December 2014
Interview of Michael Brown's parents
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po8kwWS_nLU
I chose to analyse the reaction of Michael Brown's parents to the Darren Wilson interview. This is the video reaction by The Young Turks. They are angry at Darren Wilson for what he did and they insist that they only want change. They are angry that he claimed to have a clear conscience and the reaction of Ferguson, not having anyone give their condolences. They claim that they had been disrespected by the people. When he said that he had a clear conscience they make the point that how could anyone have a clear conscience after killing someone, even after an accidental death. And the reaction to the body, leaving it there for 4 hours, to a point where the organs couldn't be donated.
They make the point that for everyone else this will fade out of the news cycle, for her and and his father this will haunt them for the rest of their lives. TYT state that they are very critical of the jury in the trial and refer to previous examples of white policeman being allowed to walk after killing a black person. Such as the Trayvon Martin shooting. the video shows that TYT are very critical of the justice system, showing that there are obvious injustices that take place and they happen far too regularly. This is very typical of this news organisation, who are typically very honest and upfront about their opinions on these kind of matters.
Many people have shown support for Michael Brown after the no charge verdict, including the St Louis Rams, who had 5 Black players walk out of the tunnel with their arms in the 'hands up dont shoot' position. There has been calls for an apology and a punishment for those players, but, the NFL will take no action against them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC6tSO9Ry3I
99 to 1
Here I am going to be analysing the Green Day song "99 Revolutions" from their 2013 album "Tre".
The song is an anthem referring to the recent 'Occupy Movement' and hits many of the issues that face americans today. It is an anti-American song in a way as it points out the flaws in the American system.
"Theres a trouble in the air a rumble in the street"
The occupy moment saw a mass amount of people protest about the inequality due to the distribution of wealth in the USA. One of the major stages for the Occupy Movement was in Oakland California, where the band originates from. They gave mass support to the cause as they had grown up in poverty however they did feel that they would receive criticism because they belong to the 1% rather than the 99%.
"A going out of business sale And a race to bankruptcy"
The way in which the system for new businesses to set up works means that many businesses suffer from bad insurance, mortgages and unfair tax. It is unclear how many small business fail in their first year of start up, the number is between 7-9 out of ten. Businesses are expensive to set up and often leads in bankruptcy. The regulations and tax cuts only support the big corporations. The writer is calling the start up of small businesses as a race to bankruptcy stating that it is the goal to get there quickest.
Its not one to 99, its 99 to one
A common cause and a call to arms
For the health of our daughters and our sons
The realisation of the situation. The Odds aren't in the majorities favour, and it should be something that unites everyone in the 99% and if it doesn't change soon, the next generation will be living in poverty. They are the only ones that can help change, the majority of the government support the 1% and they have to get their attention by any means.
For the health of our daughters and our sons
The realisation of the situation. The Odds aren't in the majorities favour, and it should be something that unites everyone in the 99% and if it doesn't change soon, the next generation will be living in poverty. They are the only ones that can help change, the majority of the government support the 1% and they have to get their attention by any means.
Its 99 revolutions tonight
99 revolutions tonight
99 revolutions tonight
99 revolutions tonight
The chorus just states that 99 revolutions need to happen, and they have to start now. They can't wait for tomorrow. it has to happen now otherwise it will never change.
99 revolutions tonight
99 revolutions tonight
The chorus just states that 99 revolutions need to happen, and they have to start now. They can't wait for tomorrow. it has to happen now otherwise it will never change.
Theres a rat in the companyA bail out on easy street
How the fuck did the working stiff
Become so obsolete?
The big corporations, The banks, the car manufactures are being bailed out because of their capitalistic tendencies. The 'Rats' are those that are at the top, taking big bonuses while the company is going under, that is until they are bailed out. It's said that the government lost $11.6 Billion in the Gm bailout while AIG received a near $200Billion (and are seeking more) While this is happening, people are working to survive. The writer is arguing that the big cooperation are losing tax payers money, money that those who pay the tax need to survive and are seeing no benefit of it being spent. The country was built on the hard work of individuals but now they are no longer seen as important. It was often said that the workers were the back bone of the American economy, yet they clearly aren't.
Hit the lights and bang the drum
And let your flag unfold
And let your flag unfold
They need to take action.
Cause history will prove itself
In the hall of justice and lost souls
This inequality is just another in a long list of ones that have troubled the united state. From Slavery to woman rights to the civil rights movement. America has always had an issue with equality (although it promises it) how long until this issue will be heard, do people need to die?
We live in troubled times
From the ghettos to an empty suburban home
We live in troubled times
And Im 99 percent sure that somethings wrong
it''s all wrong
Everyone who is apart of the 99% should feel wronged it connects those who live in absolute poverty ( the ghettos) to those who live in suburban American. It also hits on the realisation that the number of those who live in suburbia are declining and that many new suburban homes are empty because no one can afford them.
From the ghettos to an empty suburban home
We live in troubled times
And Im 99 percent sure that somethings wrong
it''s all wrong
Everyone who is apart of the 99% should feel wronged it connects those who live in absolute poverty ( the ghettos) to those who live in suburban American. It also hits on the realisation that the number of those who live in suburbia are declining and that many new suburban homes are empty because no one can afford them.
Really this song does criticise the distribution of wealth in the USA. it hits the issues that effect those who are in the 99% such as the difficulties in starting a business, or that the workers can't get a break in the system. It tries to bring everyone together to protest against the 1%.
Thursday, 27 November 2014
Pictures of the poor
Here I have the two images I have chosen to the most part show that not much has changed in America since the great depression, as many still face a battle for survival be it food or shelter for the night. However it may be hard to believe but in actual fact things have gotten better and this is here the two images differ. Back in the day it was trained and educated people that were struggling looking for work or resorting to something which was well beneath their skills set, in today's life it is mostly the uneducated and the untrained that waver through the poverty line. Even though most media's would have you believe that America's poverty is at its worse with 50 million under the poverty line, back in the 1930's it is hard to put a precise figure on the number of unemployed or homeless but most estimate it to be a fair amount than today's. Plus the fact during the great depression it was seen more as a family issue with large numbers moving to "Hoovervilles" after being forced out of their homes where as in present day it seems mostly homelessness effects individuals. Even with poverty in modern times you are still likely to own a home or least have a roof over your head, great depression times you either traveled place to place trying to track down work or moved your family to a refuge.
Urban America
Urban America, The Great Depression.
This is an image of the government providing free meals to people that could not provide food for their families or themselves after losing their jobs in The Great Depression.
Urban America, The Recent Recession.
This is an image of job seekers waiting to attend a job fair in Brooklyn, New York City in 2010.
The Great Depression and The Great Recession both hit the United States of America incredibly hard. With huge numbers of people out of work and unable to find a job with a stable income. During the 1930s it got so bad that people could barely afford to eat, so the government opened kitchens to provide food to the homeless and to people who had recently lost their jobs.
From the images I have chosen you can see the difference in mentality. During the recent recession people were more adamant to find more work as soon as possible, instead of just looking for somewhere to help provide food. Finding another job was the peoples first decision, regardless of what job it was as there were so little jobs to be had.
Depression/Recession
Its no doubt that the depression in the 1930's caused more of a problem in America with unemployment levels than the recession of 2008, but both did cause rises in unemployment and poverty throughout America. As seen in the pictures below, however one has a lot more of an impact than the other.
This is an image of a soup kitchen for the unemployed during the 1930's depression in America. It shows how many people were out of work, and not just for a while but for such a long amount of time that they couldn't even afford to eat and get basic food supplies. Even though the line isn't shown fully in the picture we still get the main idea that the line is long, not only is it long but the people are not even in a single file line. Unemployment was massive. Huge amounts of people had no food to eat and had to rely on soup kitchens not for the homeless, but for the unemployed. Puts unemployment and homelessness on the same level. Really bad.
This image is saying quite the opposite about the recession in America from 2008, compared to the depression in the 1930's. This shows people blaming what I can assume is the government for their unemployment. It shows that a large, not as big as the depression, number of people are unemployed that would like to work. It doesn't quite show poverty on the same scale as the 1930 depression. People here are asking for jobs and work, not lining up for something to eat. However it does similarly show a big loss of work, people that want to work are unable to work because there are no jobs to take.
Recession and Depression :)
Detroit was hit hard by both the Great Depression and the 2008 Recession. Detroit is know as the motor capitol of America and gained most of it's wealth from the manufacturing of cars during the early 1900's gifting it the name 'Motown'
This is a picture of Detroit in 2008. The buildings you can see are those of the old city and the big building is the General Motor headquarters. General motor was bailed out by Obama's Government in a attempt to boost American trade in the wake of the recession. Many thought that this move would help rebuilt the city of Detroit that had been slowly 'crumbling' since the late 1950's. How ever this photo clearly shows that nothing has really changed. 36% of the population live in poverty and the city is running at a $365m deficit. The saviour of GM was clearly one that doesn't help the people of Detroit, yet helps those at the top.
This is an image of a Hooverville in Detroit during the 1930's. Being a huge motoring city, before the Great Depression the city saw great opportunity for people to work for the car companies, but during the Great Depression many people had to be laid off because no one was buying cars. The mayor of the city, Frank Murphy, stated that 'No one would go hungry" and set up soup kitchens. When a new mayor, Frank Couzens came in it in 1933, it all went to pot. The city was spending too much on welfare and receiving too little in tax to pay teachers and police officers. However, Couzens balanced the budgets later on.
This is a picture of Detroit in 2008. The buildings you can see are those of the old city and the big building is the General Motor headquarters. General motor was bailed out by Obama's Government in a attempt to boost American trade in the wake of the recession. Many thought that this move would help rebuilt the city of Detroit that had been slowly 'crumbling' since the late 1950's. How ever this photo clearly shows that nothing has really changed. 36% of the population live in poverty and the city is running at a $365m deficit. The saviour of GM was clearly one that doesn't help the people of Detroit, yet helps those at the top.
Its Capitalism Stupid! Recession/Depression Images

This image is from the 1930's and shows a man selling a car for $100, mentioning on the sign that he 'lost it all on the stock market'. This would have been common sight in the 1930's as so much money was lost, and the public suffered badly. This man would have been looking for whatever money he could find, no matter what it took. Note that he appears to be dressed well, in a suit and hat, suggesting that maybe he worked in a big business, showing that they too were affected.
This is an image from a Wall Street protest in 2008, following the beginning of the Great Recession. Wall Street was the location of its beginning, or at least represented it, as they center of Capitalism in the US. Greed among the bankers and hedge fund workers was the cause according to man that had lost their jobs. The sign reads 'Its Capitalism Stupid', and this suggests that this the inevitable outcome of Capitalism. People were also annoyed because the banks were bailed out, but the people weren't. They had lost a lot of money and their jobs and had nothing in return given to them.
This changed from the 1930's because of the way that people reacted. There was some anger in the 1930's but some people, for example, the guy in the image, persevered and did what they could to raise money. In 2008, people protested and there was a lot more emphasis on the inequality of the Capitalist system. Banks were at the center of the controversy and were helped as people lined the street to announce and show their disgust.
Wednesday, 26 November 2014
American Dream, Example of Success

Michael Oher with the Tuohy family, who adopted him at the age of 18
I chose to use Michael Oher as my example of the American Dream and a success story from it. Micheal Oher was born in Memphis, Tennessee, to a crack addicted mother and had 11 brothers and sisters. His father was frequently in prison. As a result, he didn't receive a lot of attention as a child and didnt have a lot of discipline. He had to repeat both the first and second grades. He also attended 11 different schools in his first 9 years of school.
At age 7, he was placed in foster care and bounced around several homes and experienced homelessness. His biological was murdered in prison.
He played Basketball and Football while in High School. He ends up at Briarcrest Christian School. After the 2003 football season at Briarcreast, he was named the Division II (2A) Lineman of the Year and First team Tennessee All-State.
In 2004, Leigh Anne and Sean Tuohy, a couple with a daughter and son attending Briarcrest, allowed Oher to live with them and eventually adopted him. The family began tending to his needs after becoming familiar with his difficult childhood. They also hired a tutor for him, who worked with him for 20 hours per week.
They helped get his GPA up to an acceptable level, providing him with a place to live and sleep, in a stable environment for the first time in his life. While he insists he knew football before he was adopted living with the Tuohy's allowed him to focus on it more.
He went to Ole Miss College (Mississippi), which he didnt expect to happen, previously being homeless and was the 23rd pick in the 2009 NFL draft, selected by the Baltimore Ravens.
He has had a film made about his early life and childhood, leading up to the point he enters college. However, he was entirely happy about his on-screen representation. He insists that he is more open and talkative and more fun-loving. To set the record straight, he wrote an autobiography, called 'I beat the odds, from Homelessness to the Blind Side and Beyond'.
His is a story that links to the American Dream because he came from such a rough childhood. He was homeless and had no biological father and an absent mother, moving from foster home to foster home, before being adopted by the Tuohy's. Through hard work and guidance, and a degree of luck, he has became a Super Bowl champion and NFL player, currently for the Tennessee Titans.
The American Dream
For my example of the American Dream and contemporary success I'm using Chris Gardner.
From his childhood, Chris Gardner faced many struggles, from being raised by a single mother, of whom he and his siblings were taken from and put into care due to her abusive boyfriend, and her unstableness.
Once he graduated he joined the navy, married and had a son. After he was discharged from the Navy he worked as a medical research associate and for a scientific supply distributor. After the birth of his son he was adamant that he would find a career that would better his financial issues so he could better provide for his family, but do to so without a collage degree. He applied for a training program at brokerages, and whilst doing so he was living on barely any money. Because of this his wife ended up leaving him but due to his own childhood and not having a positive male influence to grow up with, he fought to keep his son with him, and not with his mother.
He managed to get a place on the training program, but the salary was so poor, that him and his son became homeless. During the day he would take his son to daycare, and he would go to his training program, but in the evenings and nights he would struggle to find a safe place for them both to sleep. They would end up sleeping in cheap motels, in flophouses, on public transport and even in a bathroom at a subway station. He eventually asked a reverent if he would let them stay at a church's shelter for homeless woman, to which the reverend thankfully agreed.
Throughout the program, Gardner never let on to his co-workers how awful his life was outside of the office.
Due to all his hard work and commitment during the program, he was awarded with the job as stockbroker at the end.
From there his persistence and strive for better in life has shown through his accomplishments.
He became a top earner when he worked at Bear Stearns & Co between 1983 and 1987.
After that he founded the brokerage firm Gardner Rich.
In 2006 he became CEO and founder of Christopher Gardner International Holding.
Today he is very much involved with helping homeless men, women and families that are employed yet struggling to live as he was.
He has worked with and on behalf of organisations such as The National Fatherhood Initiative, The National Education Association Foundation and The International Rescue Committee. And he is also still very committed to the Church, where he and he son received help whist they were homeless.
Chris wrote the book The Pursuit of Happyness, which was a book based on his life and struggles as a homeless single parent and how he went from rags to riches.
He also wrote the memoir Start Where You Are: Life Lessons In Getting From Where You Are To Where You Want To Be.
The Pursuit of Happyness was then turned into in motion picture, in which Will Smith played his character. When asked about Chris Gardner, Will Smith said "Chris represents the American Dream.
The image of success that Chris Gardner as an example presents, I think matches quite well with that of Ragged Dick. Although Ragged Dick was a homeless child and we don't actually see how he turns out past the book, I think key aspects are present in both. Both Gardner and Ragged Dick have poor childhoods, both are shown to have little or no qualifications and they both show a determination to better themselves regardless of this. In Ragged Dick, he is taught how to read and write to better his opportunities, and Gardner joins a trainee program to gain new skills to acquire a job.
I think Chris Gardners story is very incredible one, which goes to show that regardless of your background, your childhood, or your qualifications, with the right attitude and determination in life, that you can succeed.
American Day Dreamy Dreamers
My Example for proof of the American Dream
Arnold Schwarzenegger:
Born in a small Austrian village, the future Terminator star had a rough childhood, including
His success as a muscled poser led to endorsement deals, a book for would-be bodybuilders and being featured in an influential documentary about the sport, Pumping Iron. Small movie parts followed, with his big break coming in the lead role of 1982's Conan the Barbarian. Even greater success came with the 1994 release of The Terminator and Twins. A steady slate of action and comedy films, many of them huge hits, followed.
In 2003, Schwarzenegger was elected through a recall election as governor of California (The governator) and later was re-elected to a final term that expired in January 2011.
Estimates of his net worth are not that accurate if we're honest, some say as far as $100 million to $300 million other to $3 billion. To round off his enormous success he truly reached the American Dream with his divorce from Maria Shriver after he knocked up his maid, achieving the true millionaire life style he fought for.
Thursday, 20 November 2014
American Dream: Contemporary Example of Success
Contemporary example of the American Dream
Kirk Kerkorian, Tracinda CEO
Kirk is a really good example of success and The American Dream. Kirk was born to Armenian immigrants in 1917 gained his fortune from nothing. At the age of 6 his faimly lost everything, their home and their farm which forced them to move to the west coast. (ideas of westward expansion? chasing the American Dream). By the still very young age of 9, he helped his familt as best he could, selling newspapers and doing odd jobs.
Instead of attending high school he chose a different path, first becoming an amateur boxer and then an Air force delivery pilot during the second world war. Using his money from that job he purchased his first plane to train pilots and do jobs around Vegas.
He started to build out his air charter and sold it for $104,000,000 in stock. With this money he purchased 80 arces of land. He leased some of the land to Caesar's Palace; he also built the International Hotel and purchased the Flamingo Hotel, and sold both to Hilton at a premium. He purchased and restructured Hollywood's MGM Studios and built the MGM Grand, which became MGM Resorts, and remains a minority shareholder in the MGM Mirage. even though the company has recently had hard times, the 94 year old is still worth 3.3 billion today.
This is a classic example of the American Dream. A man building up from nothing, being kick out of his home and forced to start a new. We see that Kirk had very little but used what he did have wisely, to start a business of transportation across America. It is a classic example of someone with nothing, building up to fame and fortune. (The American Dream). This image of the American dream portrays much of the success that we see in Ragged Dick. Kirk, like Dick, had next to nothing and is a story of how you can start off with nothing and work ur way up, Dick from his shoe shine, to a job as a clerk and our modern example of Kirk as a farmer to an incredibly wealthy business man. These stories almost match. Both show the same level of success. Coming from the very bottom and ending at the very top. However we don't know what becomes of Dick past his clerk job, but we can assume he goes on to achieve great things and continues his way up the 'ladder' of success.
Thursday, 13 November 2014
Right to Bare Arms
Pro gun website
The website I have chosen to look at for "pro guns" is http://www.keepandbeararms.com. This website focuses on helping the people of America maintain the right to bare arms, and in their words, "protect themselves and the people they love effectively from anyone who would do them harm". It's intentions are to provide readers with information about gun policies, and encourages readers to help them in their mission to maintain the second amendment.
Anti-gun website
The website I have chosen to use for anti guns is http://momsdemandaction.org/. This is website that recognises the dangers of the right to bare arms. The writers identify as mothers from America, using puns about doing the groceries and not using guns. As a collective they are taking action to try and stop gun access for children, and to stop the right to open carry, for the safety of their children and families. The website has links to campaigns that they are carrying out and way that people can help and donate towards the cause to help make it happen.
Overview
While I agree with people feeling protected in their own country, I do feel like if guns were not a right in America less people would feel the need to own their own guns. For example in the UK where their is no law giving people the right to bare, fear of guns is a very low problem and often not a concern.
I completely disagree with the right to bare arms. In my opinion it actually helps to increase gun crimes in America. I usually get the impression that without guns, Americans are fearful of their own country and that they need to have the right to guns to feel safe and protected within their own land.
Buying guns in the USA has become so easy nowadays that pretty much anyone can walk into a store and purchase a gun of their choosing. Surely with all the crimes that include guns, the law would have made it somewhat harder to purchase at least. I don't think America will ever take away the right to bare arms from its people, but I do think that they need to harden down on who is aloud to purchase. If this was the case I believe gun violence would see a drop in statistics.
When reading through the pro gun website, I cant help but feel like the writers almost try to guilt trip some readers into helping them with their cause. They use the line "If you're a red-blooded American (or patriot in another land with a heart for our cause) with Freedom running thick in your veins" Implying that people that don't help, are not real Americans. They even have a page for people reading that disagree with what they are about, giving them a list of different links to help try to persuade them to change their minds.
The website I have chosen to look at for "pro guns" is http://www.keepandbeararms.com. This website focuses on helping the people of America maintain the right to bare arms, and in their words, "protect themselves and the people they love effectively from anyone who would do them harm". It's intentions are to provide readers with information about gun policies, and encourages readers to help them in their mission to maintain the second amendment.
Anti-gun website
The website I have chosen to use for anti guns is http://momsdemandaction.org/. This is website that recognises the dangers of the right to bare arms. The writers identify as mothers from America, using puns about doing the groceries and not using guns. As a collective they are taking action to try and stop gun access for children, and to stop the right to open carry, for the safety of their children and families. The website has links to campaigns that they are carrying out and way that people can help and donate towards the cause to help make it happen.
Overview
While I agree with people feeling protected in their own country, I do feel like if guns were not a right in America less people would feel the need to own their own guns. For example in the UK where their is no law giving people the right to bare, fear of guns is a very low problem and often not a concern.
I completely disagree with the right to bare arms. In my opinion it actually helps to increase gun crimes in America. I usually get the impression that without guns, Americans are fearful of their own country and that they need to have the right to guns to feel safe and protected within their own land.
Buying guns in the USA has become so easy nowadays that pretty much anyone can walk into a store and purchase a gun of their choosing. Surely with all the crimes that include guns, the law would have made it somewhat harder to purchase at least. I don't think America will ever take away the right to bare arms from its people, but I do think that they need to harden down on who is aloud to purchase. If this was the case I believe gun violence would see a drop in statistics.
When reading through the pro gun website, I cant help but feel like the writers almost try to guilt trip some readers into helping them with their cause. They use the line "If you're a red-blooded American (or patriot in another land with a heart for our cause) with Freedom running thick in your veins" Implying that people that don't help, are not real Americans. They even have a page for people reading that disagree with what they are about, giving them a list of different links to help try to persuade them to change their minds.
Guns and the American 2nd Amendment
The first website I've chose which is in favor of the second amendment is http://gunowners.org/ though the title is pretty self explanatory it is a website devoted to ensuring every American has there right to bare arms. This website is actually a pressure group which tend to lean to the right with constant updates on Obama's war on guns. An example of such is one of there campaigns is titled with the question "If your restricted on your guns then Obama thinks your a terrorist" which could be construed as a tad extreme. Not only does website defend the second amendment but represents those who believe in a secular life style with no government intrusion.
The second website I chose was the anti-Gun pressure group "Every Town" http://everytown.org/who-we-are/ they consist of 2.5 million members from the public sector to concerned mothers who wish to end gun violence. Though this group do not want to expel guns from the country just put in more measures to make sure that they don't fall into the wrong hands, they are deemed anti gun by most media's. There leading campaign at the moment is to end the open carry of Guns in convince stores such as Wal Mart and Kroger.
I'm personally against fire arms though i can see there appeal, not only are they pleasing to use in a recreational sense but I can understand how they would make you feel safer. After all guns have been called the "great equalizer" no matter who threatens you or your family you know you stand a chance when your armed. the issue is it creates a cold war atmosphere with people just getting bigger and bigger guns in hopes that who ever that mystery person is who is destined to threaten you, you have the bigger stick. American gun policy becomes even more interesting when compared to other countries who allow the sale of fire arms. Such as Switzerland this is a country with a larger percentage than the U.S. that own weapons but hardly any gun violence, this could be for many reasons but the most popular theory is that because of Swizerland's conscript army, you are forced to learn a regimental understanding of the dangers of guns and how they are properly used also the fact no one has access to guns until they are conscripted around the age of 18 and it is uncommon to leave before your 30's. America's gun policies could also be compared with Australia since they had the same type gun policy in the past but when they had there first mass shooting the Australian government decided the end all types of gun ownership, something which has hardly phased any Americans and there views on guns.
Guns
Pro-Gun Website - http://gunowners.org/
This website discusses the positives of gun ownership in America and how it helps, as it says on the website, 'saves lives'. It defends the second amendment and the right to defend yourself. It also contains many stories of people that used guns to protect their family from home invasion. ' Gun-Toting Grandpa Defends Wife, Granddaughter From Rapists In NC Home Invasion'. This is called the Self Defense corner of the website. It is so radical as to say that Britain has to endure not having guns for self defense. Implying them as essential for self defense.
Anti-Gun Website - http://www.bradycampaign.org/
This website is massively against guns, gun violence and the sale of guns to dangerous people in America. Not the sale of guns as a whole, but to people with a violent past/ criminal record. Slides on the main page skip between anti-gun protests by the group and stories of tragedy related to gun violence. 'my son will be six years old forever'. The site looks to changing laws, gun culture and the gun industry.
I disagree with the uncontrolled sale of guns in America. There are some laws controlling the sale of pistols in America, an ID and background check. However it just seems ridiculous that i could walk into a gun shop and buy a rifle or a shot-gun without the same background check. Putting firearms into anyone's hands is insane. The uncontrolled sale of guns in the states leads to a lot of accidents, deaths and school shootings that are not that uncommon in America. So many lives are taking by guns every year in America and these stories are no hard to come by. On my anti- gun website there are many stories of people killed by guns, some are as young as 6 years old. There should be a full background check for the sale of any fire arm in America, otherwise you could just be handing over a fully automatic rifle to a murderer, which leads to the gun violence that Americans see so often.
The first website i chose has this view that is shared between the majority of Americans, that guns are needed for safety and protection in your own home. It is not this point i disagree with. A country like America, where guns are some common, it is logical to sell them for protection in your own home. The part that i disagree with is that it is a human right to posses a gun. People with a criminal record or under a certain age, e.g. 21 should not be able to purchase a gun. There should be a full background check first. There is so much tragedy around the uncontrolled sale of guns, be it death or injury that needs to be stopped. Some regulations should be introduced to control the sale of firearms.
Guns :)
The first website I have chosen to look at is the pro gun website http://gunssavelives.net/about-this-site/. This website is set up to give its readers up to date news based on second amendment rights, self defence and all news involving firearms. It largely focuses on the 'Carry' laws. The website gets over 3,00,000 views every month making it a very popular website.
The second website is the Anti-Gun violence website http://csgv.org. This website doesn't focus on banning guns completely but does look to try and put an end to the unnecessary amount of gun violence that happens in America. They focus on the propaganda of the NRA and aim to take a more democratic approach in trying to reach their aim.
I strongly agree that the main issue with guns is the unnecessary violence that they seem to endure. This could be put down the the amount of states that allow concealed (and even open) carry of a fire arm. The first website clearly has the view that if everyone is allowed to carry a gun on their persons, no one will try and shoot or harm another. This view is one that I strongly disagree with because someone can feel threatened without actually being threatened, which could be a ground to shoot at someone. I wouldn't go as far as banning guns completely, as Americans have that strong view that it is their right to 'bear arms' and I agree that having guns to hunt with is fine. But having the right to have a deadly weapon on your persons at all time and having the power to kill/harm someone who may or may not be wanting to harm you seems too far. They are giving people the freedom to protect themselves in certain situations yet are taking away peoples freedom of not living in fear that if they do something that someone may seem as threatening ( such as running down the street towards someone, with say headphones in so that they cannot hear 'warning's therefore get shot by a 'threatened' person' just seems wrong.
Wednesday, 12 November 2014
2nd Amendment Rights
http://home.nra.org/
https://www.vpc.org/gunviolence.htm
I have chosen to use the NRA (National Rifle Association) website and Violence Policy Center website. The NRA is the largest pro-gun association in the US, with the VPC being one of the largest gun control organisations. The NRA is known to be very pro gun and has a very vocal opinion when it comes to gun ownership and aims to allow everyone to have an option to carry guns. Americans see it as a basic right to own guns and use them to not only hunt, but to protect their family. The following clip is a 6 minute video showing the response to gun control laws in Australia https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyS3CEIbpJo . This shows how angry some of the gun owners got when the laws were introduced and this would only be a fraction of what would occur in America if such laws were introduced. The NRA is an association that strives for Gun ownership and has a lot of power to get their way.
This is a brief history of the start of the NRA taken from their website, "Dismayed by the lack of marksmanship shown by their troops, Union veterans Col. William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate formed the National Rifle Association in 1871. The primary goal of the association would be to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis". The idea began as something aimed to improve the armed forces and has evolved into the organisation it is today.
Many pro-gun organisations have called for the arming of more people, especially teachers, in the wake of Sandy Hook, Newtown, Columbine etc. These massacres, according to the NRA and others, could have been avoided or at least limited, if more people had guns. Another example is the Luby's shooting in Texas, where thoughts of survivors, one in particular had been, if they had had access to their gun they could have taken out the gunman and limited the number of casualties and maybe saved the lives of her parents. This extract is from the NRA website and gives a little bit about who they are today; "While widely recognized today as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights, the NRA has, since its inception, been the premier firearms education organization in the world. But our successes would not be possible without the tireless efforts and countless hours of service our nearly four million members have given to champion Second Amendment rights and support NRA programs. As former Clinton spokesman George Stephanopoulos said, "Let me make one small vote for the NRA. They're good citizens. They call their congressmen. They write. They vote. They contribute. And they get what they want over time."
I don't agree with the NRA, I think that allowing everyone to have guns is a stupid idea that will lead to more shootings of less killings, as they shooter will be gunned down themselves. Their opinion, while it makes sense, does not consider the side if the parents of murdered kids, who have to then go out and see such blatant ownership of guns, such disregard for public safety that isn't seen as such by the NRA. They see it as a deterrent fro anyone who may consider opening fire. Most are gunned down anyway and expect it to happen so it won't stop them. By limiting guns the amount of accidents can be cut down and by having stricter gun laws then the dangerous people that own guns can have them taken away, leading to less shootings (maybe).
VPC is an organisation that tries to spread its message of gun control. Most of these organisations, including the VPC, has used the same examples as Pro-Gun organisations as to why guns should be restricted in use. In their opinion, if guns were controlled, then these horrendous crimes wouldn't occur as they wouldn't have access to such deadly weapons. A counter argument is what happened when certain drugs were outlawed. How, if people wanted to, they would still be able to obtain the outlawed item illegally and if they were legal, it could be controlled and such behaviour wouldn't happen. As much as their point makes sense, for me, while outlawing guns completely is a waste of time, age restrictions and background checks should be used, to filter out the criminals and the under aged from owning deadly weapons.
The following is from the VPC website and concerns results from a 2012 study; https://www.vpc.org/press/1410gundeath.htm
This shows that gun control and strict laws can limit the amount of gun crime that goes on on the streets of America. This has some truth as incidents such as the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown shootings may not have occurred, although, that can still be linked back to racism in America, but also linked to gun control. If the shooters, George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson, had not been in possession of guns then they would not have been killed, although, Wilson was a police officer, and is justifiable for having a weapon. (Worth noting shooters were Hispanic and White respectively).
This clip shows how easy it is to buy a gun in Texas (stupidly so). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc1FLSg2wIY
The VPC have particular interests in outlawing weapons such as the AR-15, the one used by Adam Lanza in the Newtown shooting.
In my opinion, guns shouldn't be outlawed completely because people will get hold of them if they really want to. But, background checks should be more thorough and age limits, such as 21, should be in place, as well as the ownership of guns among young children who have had guns brought for them. At least by keeping some guns legal, it can be controlled, but weapons such as assault rifles and machine guns should be kept off the street and in gun ranges, unable to be fired by anyone other than an adult. This would limit accidents among young children, such as the gun going off and killing them accidentally. but the culture is so strong in the US people will always find loopholes or ignore it altogether, as they consider a right as an American to have a weapon.
https://www.vpc.org/gunviolence.htm
I have chosen to use the NRA (National Rifle Association) website and Violence Policy Center website. The NRA is the largest pro-gun association in the US, with the VPC being one of the largest gun control organisations. The NRA is known to be very pro gun and has a very vocal opinion when it comes to gun ownership and aims to allow everyone to have an option to carry guns. Americans see it as a basic right to own guns and use them to not only hunt, but to protect their family. The following clip is a 6 minute video showing the response to gun control laws in Australia https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyS3CEIbpJo . This shows how angry some of the gun owners got when the laws were introduced and this would only be a fraction of what would occur in America if such laws were introduced. The NRA is an association that strives for Gun ownership and has a lot of power to get their way.
This is a brief history of the start of the NRA taken from their website, "Dismayed by the lack of marksmanship shown by their troops, Union veterans Col. William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate formed the National Rifle Association in 1871. The primary goal of the association would be to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis". The idea began as something aimed to improve the armed forces and has evolved into the organisation it is today.
Many pro-gun organisations have called for the arming of more people, especially teachers, in the wake of Sandy Hook, Newtown, Columbine etc. These massacres, according to the NRA and others, could have been avoided or at least limited, if more people had guns. Another example is the Luby's shooting in Texas, where thoughts of survivors, one in particular had been, if they had had access to their gun they could have taken out the gunman and limited the number of casualties and maybe saved the lives of her parents. This extract is from the NRA website and gives a little bit about who they are today; "While widely recognized today as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights, the NRA has, since its inception, been the premier firearms education organization in the world. But our successes would not be possible without the tireless efforts and countless hours of service our nearly four million members have given to champion Second Amendment rights and support NRA programs. As former Clinton spokesman George Stephanopoulos said, "Let me make one small vote for the NRA. They're good citizens. They call their congressmen. They write. They vote. They contribute. And they get what they want over time."
I don't agree with the NRA, I think that allowing everyone to have guns is a stupid idea that will lead to more shootings of less killings, as they shooter will be gunned down themselves. Their opinion, while it makes sense, does not consider the side if the parents of murdered kids, who have to then go out and see such blatant ownership of guns, such disregard for public safety that isn't seen as such by the NRA. They see it as a deterrent fro anyone who may consider opening fire. Most are gunned down anyway and expect it to happen so it won't stop them. By limiting guns the amount of accidents can be cut down and by having stricter gun laws then the dangerous people that own guns can have them taken away, leading to less shootings (maybe).
VPC is an organisation that tries to spread its message of gun control. Most of these organisations, including the VPC, has used the same examples as Pro-Gun organisations as to why guns should be restricted in use. In their opinion, if guns were controlled, then these horrendous crimes wouldn't occur as they wouldn't have access to such deadly weapons. A counter argument is what happened when certain drugs were outlawed. How, if people wanted to, they would still be able to obtain the outlawed item illegally and if they were legal, it could be controlled and such behaviour wouldn't happen. As much as their point makes sense, for me, while outlawing guns completely is a waste of time, age restrictions and background checks should be used, to filter out the criminals and the under aged from owning deadly weapons.
The following is from the VPC website and concerns results from a 2012 study; https://www.vpc.org/press/1410gundeath.htm
This shows that gun control and strict laws can limit the amount of gun crime that goes on on the streets of America. This has some truth as incidents such as the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown shootings may not have occurred, although, that can still be linked back to racism in America, but also linked to gun control. If the shooters, George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson, had not been in possession of guns then they would not have been killed, although, Wilson was a police officer, and is justifiable for having a weapon. (Worth noting shooters were Hispanic and White respectively).
This clip shows how easy it is to buy a gun in Texas (stupidly so). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc1FLSg2wIY
The VPC have particular interests in outlawing weapons such as the AR-15, the one used by Adam Lanza in the Newtown shooting.
In my opinion, guns shouldn't be outlawed completely because people will get hold of them if they really want to. But, background checks should be more thorough and age limits, such as 21, should be in place, as well as the ownership of guns among young children who have had guns brought for them. At least by keeping some guns legal, it can be controlled, but weapons such as assault rifles and machine guns should be kept off the street and in gun ranges, unable to be fired by anyone other than an adult. This would limit accidents among young children, such as the gun going off and killing them accidentally. but the culture is so strong in the US people will always find loopholes or ignore it altogether, as they consider a right as an American to have a weapon.
Thursday, 6 November 2014
American Liberty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbank5sVQrc (EXPLICIT)
I have chosen a pretty famous viral video of an old man running up to a live news reporter, stealing her microphone and cursing into it. This is an interview explaining why he did this This, although a lot less serious than the videos chosen by my fellow bloggers shows that the man felt freedom of speech is very important in America. That a man should not be fired from his job for speaking his mind.
He talks about how it wasn't right that the interviewer was fired from his job and how to him, freedom of speech is one of the biggest aspects of American liberty. This isn't an uncommon issue in America. Issues revolving around freedom of speech are constantly raised in the states. They see it as one of their biggest aspects of American liberty.
American Liberty
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOH9ORp7Mv4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF1E5ZO8Lug
For my video I've chosen the legalization of marijuana as a aspect of liberty. The reason why it's one of the many recent laws that have been passed by a more modern and liberal government, in he past the government was known for knowing best for the public but in the past couple of years president Barak Obama has been listening to public opinions and following what citizens actually want. The reasons as for why they have made it legal for public consumption differ on your view of the American government, some believe it because they can now monitor it making it safer for the user e.g. moonshine in the prohibition era was potentially toxic but since they have abolished prohibition alcohol death rates have dropped massively. Others believe that they have done only for the reasons of tax purposes so they can actually make money of this demand.
American Liberty
chttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBfx95frNDc
This is a video of the Midterm elections held on Tuesday 4th November 2014 in the United States. I believe that this shows a huge amount of freedom given to the people of america. Every two years Americans are given the chance to vote for members of both the senate and the house of representatives. This gives the people a chance to effectively change the government of the USA. It also gives the people a chance to put checks on the president. If people feel that the president isn't doing a good job they are more likely to vote for the oppositions party. The outcome of these midterms allowed the republicans to take control of the senate, making Obama a 'Lame Duck President' Meaning that he is powerless in trying to get legislation through without compromise. The power to change the balance of power in government and put more pressure on the President is a huge amount of responsibility and power on the people, it allows them to have a say on the way their country is being run and change it if they don't agree with the way it is being run. The freedom to do this is something that I feel is very important.
Wednesday, 5 November 2014
American Liberty Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w07aPHYPeTE
I have chosen to discuss a video of gay couples getting married in Oklahoma. Oklahoma is a state that has been very much against gay marriage and with its legalisation it is a big step for the state and the same sex couples that reside there. This is a state that in January of this year tried to ban marriage all together to stop the courts decision to legalise gay marriage. I know, stupid right. The video shows a now legal act. Same sex couples now have the liberty and freedom to wed and this shows the progress that the state and the entire US has made. No amount of arguing from political and especially religious groups can stop them getting married and this is a massive deal that shows that times are changing and equality for all is on the horizon. Many appeals were launched to overturn the decision but all of them were rejected and this is proof that those against gay marriage are ever decreasing in power and influence as well as numbers
Thursday, 30 October 2014
Carol Moseley Braun
Carol Moseley Braun is an American politician and lawyer. She used to be a state senator for Illinois during 1993 and 1999. In 1992, she was the first African-American woman to be elected for the U.S. Senate and remains to be the only African-American woman to have been seated, and there have only been 9 African-American men seated and another man not seated, although there have been a about 126 African-American representatives. This quite clearly shows that even nowadays there is still inequality between races, which is a topic she has touched upon herself.
During her time as senate she tackled subjects such as civil rights, racial equality and women's rights. She is also a member of a committee in support of Southern Africa, which became active during the 80s, in Chicago.
I think being the first African-American woman to have been seated is an incredible accomplishment to have. Hopefully Moseley Braun will inspire other African-Americans to join the world of politics and represent the African-American people, in hope to achieve equality between all races.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)













