Let's see how far we've come

Protest happens when people aren’t happy with the way things are. When I came into class I was aware of various forms of protest such as boycotts, marches and riots. I still think that protest has to have a cause and can come in all sizes and forms. One thing that I learned in class is that protest is in the eye of the beholder. What is protest to one person may not be to another. For example let’s take The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. One person may take a joke as nothing more than comic relief, whereas others may find it a reason to change ways. By watching the clips of Jon Stewart I also realized that sometimes protest can be indirect rather than deliberate. Stewart has repeatedly claimed that all he wants to do is entertain people rather than rile them up. However he can’t deny the fact that many people use him as a legit news show. Some people may interpret what he says in more than just a comical sense. Some times protest can cause protest. An example of this would be Ann Coulter or Michael Moore. Both spark much controversy because of their radical views. This may lead people to boycott the books and movies respectively, itself a form of protest. Protest for the same cause can come in many forms. For example some people who protest abortion may choose to do so in a reserved way. Some people on the other hand may choose to do so in a chaotic manner. I would also like to say it has been a fun semester with you guys. Good luck to all of you!

Carpe Diem

The protest song that I chose is War by Bob Marley. It was written by Alan Cole and Carlton Barrett. The first verse is derived from a speech made by former Ethopian emperor Haile Selasise I. In the song Marley is protesting the violence and the racism that was taking place in Africa at the time. He also states that he is unhappy with the way the government in Angola, Mozambique and South Africa was denying equality. He states that untill all this stops there will be war. Marley is protesting the very actions that lead to protest. In other words the reason he is protesting is ultimately to stop protest. In this particulat situation Marley is talking about the brutal violence in Africa. However what makes this a great protest song is that it can be used in almost any situation. There have been many instances of racism throughout history in many different countries and places. I think protest songs can be very effective. However most of the time the artists of protest songs are trying to draw attention and convince people who are undecided. In order to convince these people I think protest songs have to combine reasonable lyrics along with entertaining music. What sets music aside from your average CNN speech is the entertainment. People knowingly listen and produce music because they get an emotional high from it. No one plays a song just because they “have to.” However too strong a melody may take away from the lyrics and ultimately the message. I think an effective protest song needs to be entertaining. However if the artist or production company is looking to do more than just sell records, the entertainment of the song shouldn’t obstruct the public’s ability to analyze the message.

I think Ann Coulter and Michael Moore definitely can be considered protesters. Coulter often times complains about the liberal media and the methods of left winged people. Moore on the other hand is her exact opposite. Although he has criticized Republicans of all sorts, he is most often identified as a George Bush basher. Both Moore and Coulter complain about the opinions and methods of certain people on current issues. I think the reason that the two are so popular is because we as Americans love it when people just speak their minds. We all have opinions on a subject if we are educated enough to know what it is about. Coulter is one of those love or love to hate people. If she wasn’t as arrogant do you think we would be talking about her at all? What about Michael Moore? If he wasn’t so biased would we be talking about him at all? Once more why do you think we are talking about both of them in the same blog? It’s because they believe in complete opposites, yet they both feel that they are unquestionably right. Coulter appeals to people that agree with her and angers people that can’t stand her. Yet I must admit as I said in class I just love hearing her speak just to see how radical she can be. Michael Moore is the same way. I agree with some of the things he says however at times he is too extreme. We as Americans just love agreeing and/or disagreeing. Its not necessarily about loving/hating these two political pundits. It is more whether you love/love to hate them. Everyone just seems to have an opinion and we just like knowing how we feel about certain things.

Mass media such as youtube has revolutionized the way the world attains information. I don’t remember ever seeing any of these news clips live but because of a broadcasting website like youtube people can watch them whenever. This affects what people say because nothing that goes on the air is temporary anymore. Also this past information is not just held by security personal only. The general public also can view these clips whenever they choose. Also because people can post comments on videos they can convince other people to believe what they believe. Ann Coulter seems to be very conservative based. She arouses much controversy by using words such as “broad” and talking about how people are “enjoying the death of their husband” and “Hillary’s chubby legs.” Judging by the fact that she often times elicits controversy it at first seemed to me that she like being criticized by the media. However in the Ann Coulter losing it clip she states that she is tired of having to defend herself. The language she uses is very explicit and straightforward. I don’t find her words persuasive because they seem degrading and offensive. Saying someone has chubby legs? What is she 8 years old? I think it is absolutely sickening that she thinks someone wants to get paid off of someone’s debt, especially a family member. Other people that find her funny might find her persuasive. She stated that she has written five New York Times bestsellers. Often times hearing what she wrote just makes me want to read more. Not because I agree with her actions, but because I just want to see what else she has to say.

The camp Jesus Camp brings in youngsters and explains the values of God. The kids are taught to be devout Christians. However I think that the film Jesus Camp actually portrays the camp in a negative way. Near the beginning of the film we listen to a radio talk show host who explains how the Jesus Camp is far too radical. He states that these kids are apathetic and too close minded on issues such as global warming and other social controversies. A radio caller calls in and agrees with the talk show host. He even goes on to say that the organization even makes Christians look bad. Throughout the film Becky Fisher lets the viewers know that she is disappointed in the decisions that the government has been making such as legalization of abortion and outlawing prayer in school. In interviews with the kids it seems that Becky has been successful in attempting to have the kids place God at the top of their priorities. I think the sermons are what portray the camp in a negative light the most. Some of the kids cry towards the end. This makes the camp seem too harsh. Becky also seems to be accusing more than preaching. Sometimes it even seems that Becky makes God seem more like a judge or a boss rather than a father figure. She talks about sin and how sin is everywhere. This seems to put a sense of fear into the kids. It seems the film is trying to portray the camp as overly radical. Throughout the film we hear clips of the talk radio hosts opinion on Jesus Camp, all of which seem to be negative. The radio host does state that he is a devout Christian, yet doesn’t agree with some of the processes of the camp. This tells the audience that the filmmakers are not bashing Christianity in any way. They just aren’t comfortable with a few aspects of the camp.

Man now that I think about it I really don’t think I have one single method of writing. I guess it depends on the assignment. If it is a big research paper I will probably first gather all the information I can get and write it down on paper. Then I will probably try to merge all the ideas and give it a nice flow to it. It seems college professors really like thesis statements. It is like a secret ingredient that they just can’t seem to get enough of. Often times it seems that getting started writing a paper can be the most difficult task. I also have to admit that I finish things at the last minute no matter how big or small the assignment is. Many times I overestimate the writing assignment when it is first given. I tell my friends how I don’t have time to work out, throw around the football, or do anything. However then I start writing the paper… and I go to the other extreme. I realize it is not that bad and actually underestimate the tediousness of the assignment. Then I find myself typing information the night before the paper is due. For less demanding papers I usually free write. Sometimes I will put some music on but I have come to find out that music leads to procrastinating. If I listen to an upbeat song I get too pumped up but if I listen to something nice and melodic I might fall asleep especially if I am writing the paper at 2 am. One of the biggest problems I have are run on sentences because when I have one idea it sometimes builds on another and sometimes it is hard to split them apart and I just don’t feel like correcting it. One of the lamest things I do is I type my papers single spaced first. For example a 6 page double spaced paper doesn’t seem much compared to a 3 page single spaced paper. It is quite the thrill just watching the paper explode whenever you make it double spaced. It is like catching a foul ball at a baseball game! You guys should try it sometime!

The Yes Men wear suits and have a professional look. It seems that they while they are rebellious they try their hardest not to look like it. However I think that the reason they dress the way they do is because they are trying to get inside information. Its not necessarily that they are trying to create a good ethos but rather a method of executing their plan. I really don’t think that it relates to their values. The Yes Men are very open about the illegal activities that they perform and dressing up like “good citizens” I think just helps them in their task. The Punk Rock movement I think varies from person to person. Some people may see it as a form of protest against society’s norms or what not. However many people I think just want to create a sense of individualism or uniqueness. I think that the Punk Rock group likes the fact that they are getting the attention they deserve. Over time it seems that the Punk Rock look has become more of a fad than anything. There are a lot of negative stereotypes with the look, but when you think about it negative stereotypes come with every look or idea. For example a hip hop look may be associated with being gang of drug related, a gothic look may be associated with being anti-life and a “preppy” look may be associated with being stuck up, arrogant or snobbish. I think appearance often times does create a sense of appearance one way or another, however if people are willing to look past that it doesn’t necessarily have to. Many times appearance actually serves the very purpose of creating an ethos.

Both PETA and the Guerilla Girls use the internet in order to spread information about their ideas and values. This may limit the audiences to only those who have access to computers and internet. However, both organizations also use billboards, magazines and celebrity influence in order to get their names out. Certain mediums are effective for certain groups. For example, it wouldn’t make sense for PETA to put an ad in a Hunting magazine just as it wouldn’t make sense for the Guerilla Girls to put an advertisement in Playboy or Maxim. I do not necessarily agree with the idea that one’s opinion about PETA has to be one way or the other. I seem to have a gray area opinion. While PETA does tend to go to the extreme on certain topics ( such as no milk at all, no meat at all etc.) they do tend to have a point on some issues. In many places animals are an important part of one’s lifestyle for food, companionship amongst other things. Many medicines are also developed. Also if animals are studied in captivity, scientists and animal researchers can be better equipped to help them in the wild. However, people can cross the line. An example would be the case of football player Michael Vick’s dog fighting case this summer. PETA expressed their utter disgust at the acts and tried to educate people about the stereotypes associated with pit bulls. It is worth noting that many of the issues that people agree with PETA on such as dog fighting, cock fighting and animal cruelty are illegal anyway. I think it is good that PETA tries to educate people, but at the same time give people the freedom to make their own choices without making them look like criminals. (Unless they actually are as in some cases) What is particularly striking about the Guerilla girls is their ethos. They fight for women’s rights but try to do it in humorous ways. I think the humorous billboards are effective because they show a sense of “personality” behind those gorilla masks and show that they are not just unhappy radical protesters.

Critical Mass started in San Francisco in September of 1992 in order to promote the rights of Bike riders on the road. One of the key elements of critical mass is that no distinct leader is appointed. Everyone has the right to speak and make his or her point heard. Although Critical Mass originally was started to promote the rights of cyclists on the road, it can be used as a form of protest for anything. The Critical Mass website states that Critical Mass is an idea not an organization. For example, if people were wishing to spread the word of global warming Critical Mass is a possible method. People can direct attention towards themselves while at the same time encourage people to ride bikes instead of drive cars. When I first watched the movie that we watched on Monday, I didn’t understand what the point of Critical Mass was. As an avid biker I thought it was great to promote the rights of bikers but why at the expense of innocent motorists? Are they bad people for needing to be somewhere at a given amount of time? However when I visited the website I found out that this isn’t the intent of Critical Mass at all. It clearly encourages the members to socialize with the motorists and spread the word. It also encourages bikers to leave a lane open for the cars and let the motorists know when exactly the next ride will take place so they can be prepared in advance… or take part themselves. Critical Mass can be an effective form of protest. I do think that biking should be allowed on the streets but not at the expense of the motorists. In fact, in many cites in California bike lanes are present and have been around for a while so the concept isn’t knew at all. This prevents the bikers from impeding the motorists and in turn provides safety for the bikers.

Malachai Richter was a big fan of the local music scene in Chicago. However, he was also very outgoing in the issues that he was passionate about. Although he was popular with other fans of underground music in the Windy City, he didn’t establish many deep friendships. I think the fact that he was popular with many, but close to so few established an ethos of acquaintance but not necessarily a strong sense of relation. The fact that he went through a process of self immolation did wake up many of the locals in Chicago and some of the people across the nation. However, many people thought Richter may have been just as mentally disturbed as he was passionate. I think that because he seemed to be somewhat of a loner below the surface, it contributed to the uncertainty of Richter’s motives. Cindy Sheehan on the other hand is the mother of a fallen soldier who was killed in the line of duty. Sheehan admits to being against the war from the very beginning, but never started preaching anti-war activism until her son died. I think the fact that Sheehan is the mother of a fallen soldier arouses a sense of pity and empathy. Sheehan refers to Bush and his staff not only as bad decision makers but also murderers. On the background information page it refers to her as calling Bush a “bigger terrorist than Osama Bin Ladin.” Both Richter and Sheehan want to convince people that the war is unjustifiable, however their methods and character are quite different. If I was forced to choose I would have to say Sheehan’s ethos is more persuasive because one can relate to her better, whereas Malachai is someone that we are familiar with mostly on the surface.

The students in Nashville us a non violent tactic called a sit in to resist the oppression put on them and other blacks in the South. By using non violent tactics such as sit ins and boycotts, the black students developed a sense of innocence. For example, when one watches the clips and sees the white people beating the innocent black students it triggers an image of unjustifiable hatred and loathing towards black people. The ethos or credibility that the black people establish is that of innocent people who just want to be treated like the white people of Tennessee. This also triggers a sense of sympathy and empathy. As we are more educated and have progressed with race relations since 1960, one can see the injustice and unfairness the white people of Tennessee exhibit. When Looby’s house is bombed, the black community is saddened and ultimately angered. Towards the end of the second part of the clip, the African American community tries to bring a sense of logic. At Mayor Bob West’s speech, one of the students asks West if it is ethical to judge somebody’s moral character based on the color of his or her skin. After thinking about it Mayor West explains that he too believes that judging somebody on the outside is unethical thus causing the black people to be jubilant. Stokely Carmichael on the other hand tries to establish good ethos by developing a friendly relationship with the University of California student body. He does this by cracking jokes and adding humor to his speech. However he also, much like the CORE and the students at Tennessee explains his hardships thus triggering sympathy and empathy. He also similarly explains that it is unjustifiable to judge people on the color of their skin.

I believe

I believe in determination, I believe that what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, that making mistakes is necessary, that the BCS system screws teams over, that Vince Young will be one of the best football players ever, in second chances. I also believe however that values can be acquired as one lives life. I believe that most of the time, people are first instilled with the distinction from right and wrong from their parents. I believe often times religion is also very instrumental in shaping the introduction of a person’s life. This often leads to honesty, honor and helpfulness. I believe in Bob Marley’s song called “One Love”, I believe that people who play the game fairly and honestly will end up winning in the end (taken in any context). I believe that coming to the University of Texas at Austin was the best decision I made, I believe that I don’t exactly know what I am going to do with my life, I believe that that is okay. I believe that music can move you to another dimension…whatever that means, I believe that often times a diversity of perspectives and backgrounds help achieve a common goal, I believe that people should be optimistic and hope for the best. However they should also be prepared for the worst. I believe in Southern Pride, I believe that Tony Romo will one day prove all his doubters wrong and win a Super Bowl, I believe that I have written 250 words.

Protest is defined as expressing strong objection. Protest can take many forms of action such as marching, rioting or yelling and also forms of non-action such as boycotting. Whatever the style, protest occurs because people are unhappy with the way things are and want change. I think when somebody or some people make it clear that they do not approve of a certain condition protest occurs. Protest can come in the form of many people such as people marching in anger in Washington or the current Hollywood writer’s strike or in the form of a few people such as a group of vegetarians promoting animal rights. In order for something to count as protest, it needs to have a cause. Although protests don’t have to be large in number, many times people who are protesting are trying to convince other people to support them in their effort thus leading to more people taking part in the protest. However if people are happy with the way things are, people may protest change. For example rumors surfaced on the Louisiana State University campus that their beloved football coach Les Miles may be leaving. Many students and LSU fans organized a “March for Miles.” A few weeks later Miles was given an extension and remained the head football coach at LSU. In order for a protest to be successful it must contribute to a cause. For example, the “March for Miles” was not the only thing that kept Les Miles on the LSU sidelines, or boycotting may not be the only thing that leads to lower prices. However if protest draws attention to or moves an idea forward it is successful.