Peace found within an artifact

On page 135 in the Sturken article she mentions "artifacts" and the Vietnam Memorial. What are some of these artifacts that she mentions? How can we apply this idea to Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried, specifically chapter one? Be ready to discuss how the artifacts of war have come to define the Vietnam conflict and what this means to O'Brien's novel. How have these artifacts shaped how we view the Vietnam war today?

Sturken describes the letters that are left within the Vietnams Veteran Memorial are photographs,  letters describing what was once the life of the veteran, teddy bears, MIAIPOW bracelets, clothes, medals of Honor and many different artifacts. The most impacting of these artifacts are the letters that are left behind as a memory and recognition of the life of the brave soldier. The impact of these letters arrives when the letters asks in behalf of the soldiers, how they did not want anything fancy, they did not want any medals or any certificates, all they asked for was a simply understanding of what they went through.

Looking back at the first chapter for the book, The things they Carried by O’Brien one is able to identified the things each soldier identified themselves with. Some carried mementos like letters, pictures and small gifts like pebbles. Others felt the need to carry their religious objects either because they felt closer to god or because they were given to them by a family member. Then there were those whom felt the need to carry condoms, hygiene things to keep them clean, socks and a lot of artillery.

These artifacts were more than just objects to these soldiers. It was a way to connect back to their world, a world that appeared completely distant from Vietnam. By simply touching these things they would be transported somewhere where the war didn’t exist and did not make them feel like they were guilty for the killing of thousands. These artifacts kept them sane and stopped them from turning into savage animals. Each one of these individuals had a different perspective of what they war meant to them and what exactly they were fighting for. In truth that question was the one where they would all be able to agree without conflict, no one saw a point to the war.

O’Briens novel depended on the things each soldier carried mentally and physically. Each memory, each laughter shared, each gasp, each heart beat skipped they all contributed to what his novel developed to be. These individuals shared the torture it was to fight a war that most of them were forced to go to in fear of being isolated and looked at as cowards. They placed their life on the line for a country that in many occasions only thought of them as ponds. Pieces which were only used as sacrifices to conquer one the other side. As the book precedes we being to understand how recognition was not something any of them wanted. Some of the characters testimony allowed one to understand that what they ultimately wanted, what they crabbed and what they would die for were for someone, anyone to listen to what truly happened while they were at Vietnam. This were the connection is made between Obrien and Sturken. Within the book the stories are told to reveal what many of these soldiers could not build the courage to say; as for the letters written by others and left at the memorial described, what the Veterans were so  eager to exclaim.

Last thoughts

As we finish this unit in which i personally learned so much from i do have some last thoughts. I have always been on the side of immigrants being innocent and defending their rights. All of these i continue to stand for but there have been some changes. These different ideas and different perspectives that were shared during the time in which we were to discuss our papers. We were asking one of our team members about her thesis and she expressed herself very openly and said she did not know what to write about. Not because she did not have a side but because she agreed to both sides. Instantly i understood her dilemma as i find myself at points wondering what the Arizona law is really trying to achieve.

A very deep conversation was brought on and after the class ended as i drove home i thought to myself, wow things are not what i thought them to be. Immigrants come to this country as illegal individuals with the thoughts of succeeding and are aware of all the consequences they have to face. The thing that strikes me as the most shocking is that the Arizona law is something incredibly horrible occurring yet most immigrants are better prepared for this situation that the citizens; they are better prepared than those who are fighting to give them some rights.

Arizona's law is something gone public that if noticed it is not illegal. As someone who fights for justice the actions they are portraying are legal and almost understood. They plan to send back all those individuals who have criminal record and those whom are not cooperating to the economy or the well being of the united states. This is what they are suppose to be doing but is it what they are doing? In order to find this answer to this research has to be done and i intend to do so. Immigrants are part of this country and are part of each and everyone one of our lives. The appropriate thing to do would be to find a solution to this and stop trying to prevent them from coming by spending so much unnecessary money. Overall, Arizona's laws might not be meant to be so bad but it always depends on the person whom is enforcing them and how they take their meaning.

New Dreams at any Cost

Knowing what we know about SB1070 and its heavy approach to illegal workers, what is your feeling on the issue. Do migrant workers take jobs from U.S. workers? In thinking about this issue, it is important to consider what industries migrant workers tend to work in and what the wages are. Would a U.S. citizen work in these industries and/or for these wages? What role does the recession play in this debate?


The issue that is brought on by the arrival of thousands of immigrants to the U.S has many saying that these individuals are taking the jobs that many do  not want. How can someone take away something that is not claimed nor wanted. In this issue, i do not know if its the fact that i come from illegal parents, or the fact that i stand strong and oppose the fact that they are treated like non humans. Many things come through my head as i question myself but i have learned to understand that each individual has the right to pursue their happiness. 


In analyzing what kind of jobs these individuals take we discover that their goal is not to take over this country, nor is it to put anyone down in order to be successful. They take the jobs they know they are needed in such as : construction, farming, fast food industry and house maintainer. These are all jobs that are not the highest wages but they bring them enough money to send back home and to help them survive here. It gets me so irritated to hear people express their ignorant opinions when they say that immigrants are only good for two things: asking for welfare and bringing more babies to this planet. When something like this is brought to my attention i like to remind those clueless individuals that we can not stereotype a whole group for one individuals flaw. 


In the end we are all here to find a way to be happy and to each their own. I can not tell someone they are taking away my jobs when they are getting paid below minimum wage and working twice as hard the normal citizen. The economy they obtain with these jobs is not something that we should envy in fact this recession is affecting all of these people. The fact that jobs are so difficult to acquire makes it even harder for someone who is looking for opportunities to come and get a job so easily. I am proud to say that my parents worked really hard to give me what they weren't able to acquire in their country. Being an immigrant does not mean they are not capable, it means they work twice as hard to get half of the way we have reached on a normal day.

Who is to blame for our economic crisis?

WHO CAUSED OUR DESTRUCTION?

            The bad state of this economy has hit us all hard and unexpectedly, to say the least. Jobs have suddenly turned scarce in a country where the statement “the land of opportunities” seems like a fictional myth that is no longer existent. To explain this crisis there is a quote presented by Paul Craig Roberts that states, “What was good for America’s global corporation once is no longer necessarily good for it now” (Roberts 179). The essentials are not needs anymore, the needs switched to directions on how to survive. Money is made outside the U.S because of this there has to be someone to blame. This crisis was brought on by someone it was not accidental. The downfall of the global financial crisis ultimately falls on the hands of many institutions whom were overwhelm greedy but most importantly, we are all guilty for this crisis.

            The economy’s current melt down began as consumers started to over borrow money from banks. The beginning of the crisis started with the ability of any individual being capable of borrowing money in form of loans solicitations for credit cards. The facility to apply and be approved for a credit card or loan ultimately, changed the perspective on the responsibility to pay off the debt. Interesting enough writers like Stem notice that this opportunity was “precursor to increased consumer spending was the easy credit made available via credit cards and the easier acquisition of home mortgage loans” (Stem). The chance to ask for money had millions of individual’s attention.  It was a way to reach a lifestyle that under other circumstances they would not have been able to achieve. Borrowing loans to purchase the dream house or getting three credit cards because they were under everyone’s grasps was indeed a huge applier to this crisis. The consumers took the shot and began to borrow, they trusted that they would be able to pay the money back but as Stem explains in his article, “what resulted with the easy credit is that people started to find themselves in deeper debt. At first the debt increased slowly until the credit cards and mortgage debts became too much to pay off and what further caused economic and fiscal damage was increasing percentage rates” (Stem). Slowly but mounting, debt rose under credit card debt and mortgage loans because individuals didn’t have money to cover for what they had asked for. Essentially once they began to fall behind on the payments the interests began to accumulate and increase. They began rising to the point where the loaner was paying the interest and couldn’t get to the loan itself. To make things even more difficult a lot of the loaners began to lose their homes because of the failure to pay their mortgage.

Unemployment took a big step and brought a lot of people downhill with it. Once government noticed the unemployment rate raising they took a step give a hand; bringing about the rebate send out to all those whom did their taxes. This was money for individuals to spend so that money would circulate and keep it flowing to produce more of it. The possibility of handing another rebate to help cure this wound is something that was considered, but was said to not work as “it would most likely be saved, not spent” (Schor 210). Although the idea of saving money is not a bad thing it was an issue when the government was trying to tackle down this boulder. Yes, the unpaid loans were and discussed but they were not the only one. Consumers borrowing are not the only finger that should be pointing to; another one should be pointed at the ones that lend the money.

The bank’s greed in lending money to obtain profit in returned played a big role in this melt down. The idea that lending individuals so much money and assuming that the economy would be able to take it, was a big understatement. Making money was the central idea for the loans, to get the interest back was what lured many into agreeing in lending it, “they make it clear that they are these to make profits for their shareholders,” (Gomory 180) these banks made money from lending there is no doubt in that. What they saw was something more than money, they saw expansion. They wanted more and more, wanted more people to borrow so they would be able to produce more money to the stocks under their name. If one was to look at the statistics banks are not in the position they were in years ago. Looking at them individually they are not even close to where they were 5 years ago. Everyone is in debt; as Michael Shedlock explained “the state budget office projected a cumulative deficit of $21.5 billion over the next three years. Now, just two months later, that estimate has risen to $26.2 billion” (Shedlock). Shocking how in less than 90 days our debt increased by more than twenty a single state. Banks that were known for giving the most money as profit ultimately weaken. Loans weren’t being paid because there was no money to which once could pay with. Considering that “16 banks that pay the most on their business profits remitted $173 million to the state treasury. This June, just a month ago, they sent us $5 million- a 97 percent decrease.” (Shedlock). Loans were not handed out carefully, but how could they when there were no policies to guide the banks and make it possible to enforce them. If these policies would have been present it is possible to assume that maybe the lenders wouldn’t have been so lenient with the loaners and they wouldn’t need to be bail out from their own debt.

The blame game gives a turn of a 360 degree for the fingers point at everyone. Solutions are needed and solicited but to begin to correct this, acceptance has to take place. Admitting that this country is not the top anymore and that we need to stop and think becomes priority. Once this step is taking us can all help re-generate. It is not just for specific groups to help out, not just the rich whom are partially seen as the responsible group for their greed. We all have to admit to this and regenerate and help reconstruct. Some solutions were presented “buying from local food systems, hiring” (Schor 211). Tackling down the corporations that are eager to expand off shores they should spend more money here. That is one of the big problems that the U.S. faces, supporting the off shore business. If those companies that provide labor elsewhere they should pay higher taxes here in the U.S. If they intend to keep companies here and stay here then pay for it here. The value of the company is then presented, will they pay to keep those in other countries, or will they move them here were they sale their merchandise. Not only will they save money in the imports but they will provide jobs.

Corporations are not the only ones that are capable of providing jobs. Another solution that can help with the unemployment would be to create jobs that improve our cities. Let’s look around and see where bridges need to be fixed, where schools need improvement, where streets are crumbling, where things need help. Focus on the issues we have locally and build and opportunity out of it. This country used to be a leader, setting the example. Somewhere along the way we lost our way and tried to make a trail out of paper. Leader don not always have the answer they too need guidance. If we were to observe and listen to what’s around us. Some of the wisest men did it and created a symphony or a master piece. Our policies are weak because as a hole we are fragile too. It’s time to toughen up and become who we are, “the land of opportunities” once again.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1.      Stern, Peter. "Who is to Blame?." Atlantic Free Press - Progressive Opinion, OP/ED | Atlantic Free Press - Hard Truths for Hard Times. 6 May 2009. Web. 02 May 2011. <http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/13131-who-was-responsible-for-our-current-financial-crisis.html>.

2.      Capriska, William. "Who Caused the Economic Crisis?" FactCheck.org. 1 Oct. 2008. Web. 02 May 2011. <http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html>.

3.      Shedlock, Michael. "New York's Economic Crisis: Banks Play Significant Role - Seeking Alpha."Stock Market News & Financial Analysis - Seeking Alpha. 30 July 2008. Web. 02 May 2011. <http://seekingalpha.com/article/87958-new-york-s-economic-crisis-banks-play-significant-role?source=from_friend>.

4.      Buzenberg, Bill. "Investment Bankers Are Responsible for the American Financial Crisis." Gale Opposing Points. 6 May 2009. Web. 28 Apr. 2011.

5.      Malking, Michelle. "Loans to Minorities Fueled the American Financial Crisis." Gale Opposing View Points. 24 Sept. 2008. Web. 29 Apr. 2011.

6.      Johnson, June. Global Issues, Local Arguments: Readings for Writing. Boston: Longman, 2010.