Hate or Heritage?

Recent controversy has arisen over Georgia's new design for a specialty license plate, which bears the Confederate war flag. Some justify the flag in saying that it is "a symbol of the South's cultural heritage." Others believe the license plate is a symbol of hate and that it should not be allowed.

Personally, I think the license plate is obviously a symbol of hate and racism and should be banned. As Tyrone Brooks, a Georgia state representative, put it, "If the American Nazi Party applied for [a swastika on] one of those [license plates], would we grant one? Absolutely no." I agree with Mr. Brooks, because of the Confederate flag's history, is has a similar meaning as the Nazi flag. To some, the Confederate flag may only be a war flag and nothing more, but that is not the case for most people: "the Confederate flag is the semi-official symbol that represents the mark of 'old all white' traditions and the exclusionary feelings of whites towards blacks" (Kimenyi 52). Because the Confederate flag was used by the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacy groups, the flag is a banner filled with hate rather than heritage. Though some argue that the Confederate flag is "simply a way to honor the memory of their ancestors," the only thing I see the Confederate flag honoring is the brutal institutional of slavery.

Though only 35 license plates have been ordered with this new design, I still find it very concerning that the design would ever be considered. Many people might want to believe that the days of racism are in the past, however, the fight for equality for all people is far from over. The creation of this new license plate shows how there is still a ways to go until the Civil Rights Movement is truly "over."

What do you think about the new license plate design? 

Code Language

After getting hooked on our class reading book, The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, I took note of many examples of code-switching in the book. I also noticed a very close similarity to the code-switching in TBWLOW to the code-switching in my life as a New Trier student.

NPR's blog defines code-switching as when "many of us subtly, reflexively change the way we express ourselves all the time...between different cultural and linguistic spaces and different parts of our own identities..." To me, NPR is saying that code-switching is when people change the way they talk based on who they are talking to. From a young age, I have been trained to talk to certain people in different ways; as I'm sure most people have to some extent. You address adults with respect and use their title of Mr./Ms./Mrs/Dr... basic etiquette.

As we have discussed in American Studies class, the characters in TBWLOW often code-switch from using high dictation and proper grammar to swearing and using colloquial language. Besides just code-switching in language, I saw many examples in TBWLOW when the characters take on completely different personas based on the scenario. For example, when Oscar is with his friends Al and Miggs he acts very different than he does around his mother: "...for the first time ever in their relationship Oscar lost his temper and without a word swung on Miggs and connected so hard that homeboy's mouth spouted blood" (46). The aggressive attitude of Oscar is completely contrary to Oscar being a "loser" and a "nerd" as his sister calls him.

Similar to code-switching in TBWLOW, I have seen how many people at New Trier code-switch between personas. A persona for teachers; a persona for close friends; a persona for classmates... As Jackie O'Brien put it so well in her piece, "The Performance," in the New Trier LOGOS magazine: "With your friends you're supposed to be able to be the 'real' you. The 'original' you...You change yourself..." Jackie's piece really spoke to me. I feel like code-switching is something that we all do, even subconsciously at times. Code-switching is a means to survive and "adapt."

What are some examples of code-switching in your life? Do you think we are losing our "true self" with all the different code-switches?

Mickey D's is Mending our Future

How has our country's past shaped the present?

Recently, I came across an article by the BBC about the first McDonald's restaurant location in Vietnam that just opened up yesterday. At first glance, it might seem odd that the opening of a new McDonald's would be news-worthy. I mean, there are McDonald's locations in over 100 countries all over the world (NY Times), so why would this one be any different?

Clearly, the reason was because of the new McDonald's location--Vietnam. Though the Vietnam War ended about 40 years ago, many people in the U.S. and Vietnam still have strong feelings about the extremely controversial war. I think the effects of the Vietnam War are the main reason Vietnam is "one of Asia’s last consumer markets with significant untapped potential." Though there are other U.S. businesses in Vietnam such as KFC and Burger King, I feel like the opening of a McDonald's, an American icon, symbolizes an improving relationship between the U.S. and Vietnam.

Personally, I think it is great to see the U.S. mending relations with Vietnam. I can imagine many Vietnamese people not wanting to have anything to do with the country that killed millions of innocent people in their country for basically no reason at all. However, it appears that Vietnam is no longer bitter at the U.S. One reason a NY Times article hints as the reason for the changing attitude of the Vietnamese people is the fact that "most of [Vietnam's] 90 million citizens were born after the Vietnam War ended." It seems that the Vietnamese people have decided to move on with life rather than dwell on the past. The Vietnam War was obviously a terrible mistake, but does the new McDonald's mean that all is forgiven?

Trying to Form a More Perfect Union

I know I'm a bit late, but I have been considering the recent State of the Union Address for a while, trying to make meaning out of the long speech which was given by president Obama this past Tuesday. I have to admit that I did not actually see the delivery of the speech on Tuesday, but I have read the transcript of the address.

As we discussed in American Studies class last week, the State of the Union Address seemed very unique from any other that has been given in the last few years. Not only was the content of the speech very different from a "traditional" State of the Union, but the writing style was almost like that of a poem or a story rather than a speech. One of the first lines Obama says after greeting his audience is: "...today in America, a teacher spent extra time with a student who needed it and did her part to lift America's graduation rate to its highest levels in more than three decades." By starting his speech in a more relatable way by talking about a teacher helping her student, Obama was able to grab the attention of the "average American." Instead of starting his speech by talking about complex issues about foreign policies or the very controversial "Obama Care," Mr. Obama gave a list of stories that "gave a face" to what would otherwise be bland statistics. 

Another observation many of my classmates picked up on about the State of the Union Address was a general lack of "negativity." What I mean is, Obama did not take very much time to address any controversial issues such as troops in Afghanistan or the recent shootings in the U.S.; Obama tended to only look at the good things that have come as a result of his presidency. 

Though Obama did make a very positive speech, he did address the fact that "Inequality has deepened. Upward mobility has stalled." Obama knows that many successes have occurred during his administration such as the decreasing obesity rate and increasing college graduation rates, however, many people are still without jobs and health care in the U.S. Both unemployment and health care are major issues and I am not sure they can be solved as easily as Obama claims. I agree that things have been improving in our country, but I hope the State of the Union is really able to deliver all its promises and make Obama's dream-like speech a reality. 

Why do you think the State of the Union Address focused mainly on the greatness of the United States rather than the many issues going on?  Why do you think Obama decided to give such a different State of the Union compared to others given in the past?