TOW #24 - IRB Tuesday's With Morrie

Tuesdays With Morrie

     In the second half of my IRB book Tuesdays With Morrie, I was able to experience Morrie's last lecture on death. Essentially a thesis to Morrie's last lecture, Mitch Albom's book gives a very personal account on the relationship between a teacher and a student. In the first half of the book, Morrie and Albom were just beginning to rekindle their friendship after Albom found out about Morrie's condition on a newscast. In the second half, a bigger emphasis was put on both parties who were trying to absorb as much as they could in the limited time available. 

     Morrie's biggest message to Albom is that death is not something to be afraid or ashamed of. Albom shared this concept with his readers by including anecdotes in his book. Because Morrie's muscles are slowly deteriorating, he is unable to dress, shower, and even go to the bathroom himself. Most people would be embarrassed to hire a helper and lose their sense of privacy. However, Morrie chooses to see it in a positive light, as a way to become closer to other people. Instead of thinking about how he used to be, he believes he should "accept who you are, and revel in it." Everyday Morrie is closer to death, but he is not afraid. It only makes him value every single day, and want to his life to his fullest. Although the book is written by Albom, the anecdotes included in the book make Morrie a very real part of the reader's mind. 

     Albom also includes many of Morrie's aphorism to help convey this philosophy on death to his readers. Morrie is a very wise man who believes that people should accept reality, and work to make every day great. He does not believe death is something to be afraid of, because everything that is born will eventually all die. Albom attempts to share the wisdom he learned from Morrie by quoting the following: "Death ends a life, not a relationship." One thing that Morrie does not understand about people is their tendency to associate death with lost relationships and broken bonds. Morrie sees it quite the opposite, because it is the news of his soon death that brought him many new friends and helped him to rekindle old bonds. 

     It is through anecdotes that the audience is able to see Morrie on a more personal level, and his aphorisms helped to teach the audience about his philosophies. Mitch Albom includes these devices in his book in order to pass on the wisdom he received from Morrie and help pass on the lesson. This book was a great read and is one of the best I have had the pleasure to read of recent. It opened my eyes to the almost taboo-like idea of death and made me appreciate the little things in my life. 

   

TOW #23 - Political Cartoon of American Imperialism

American Imperialism

     During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the United States began to develop an interest in expanding past their borders. Spanish militarism in Cuba provided the United States with an opportunity to begin this involvement in Latin American affairs. This ultimately led to the Spanish American war which provided the United States with many new acquisitions: Hawaii, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. Although some claimed that these actions were purely humanitarian, others argue that it was primarily out of greed and selfishness. In this political cartoon, artist Jeanine Sabbbah shines light on the ethnocentrism behind American expansionism to prove that US imperialism was driven not only by humanitarian reasons but also militaristic and economic gains.
     Facial expressions are very significant in this cartoon, from the children up front squirming in horror at Uncle Sam to the Chinaman standing out of place in the doorway. Uncle Sam's condescending look as he faces the children of the islands shows how the U.S. viewed the Latin American islanders as inferior. This is relevant to the time period because many people used Social Darwinism to justify the monopoly of minorities. As seen with Cuba, Philippines, Hawaii, and Guam's faces leaning back in fright, it can be understood that the artist felt US imperialism was an aggressive policy.  The use of facial expressions helped in conveying the emotional downsides of imperialism.
     Clothing is also a very important device that helped the artist in achieving his purpose. Uncle Sam is the most obvious displays of nationalistic clothing with his red and white striped pants and start-dotted vest. He is seen wielding a stick towards the island children who are dressed in very American, westernized clothing. This is a portrayal of the US attempting to assimilate the minority to their standards under the pretense of mentoring them, as a teacher would a student. However, in the right corner the Chinaman and Native American are donning traditional outfits. This shows how the United States pushed away the Native American and China issue, not even bothering to dress like Americans do.  

     This political cartoon showed US imperialism as a form of teaching and learning under the pressure of assimilating to American culture. Many people felt that because it was under the decree of Uncle Sam, it was patriotic and nationalistic to support the cause. However, artist Jeanine Sabbbah felt a need to educate Americans on a different perspective of what US imperialism truly entails. It is through her use of facial expressions and clothing in this political cartoon that she is able to shine light on the darker sides of imperialism. 

TOW #22 - Social Contract Theory Rhetorical Text

  

Jean-Jacques Rousseau - “The Origin of Civil Society”

During the early 18th century, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and a few others lead what is now referred to as the Age of Enlightenment. He was a French philosopher who offered the world with a new perspective on society and how it is governed. His most famous philosophy is on the social contract theory and the freedom of the natural man. Rousseau effectively persuades his readers into agreement in his book "The Origin of Civil Society" through his use of comparisons and hypophoras.

Throughout his arguement, Rousseau stresses the importance of natural societal order and how most forms of society today obstruct it. In order to open up the eyes of his readers to this societal issue, he compares family to the state. He states "Children remain bound to their father for only just as long as they feel the need of him for their self-preservation. Once that need ceases the natural bond is dissolved" (59). Likewise, the natural order of society should be that people live protected my the government until they reach Independence. This give and take of paternal love is natural; However, in the state "the pleasure of commanding others takes its place, since the ruler is not in a relation of love to his people. Political power is (hardly) ever exercised in the interests of the governed" (60). Rousseau's technique of comparing family with the state was very effective, because it made it more apparent on how the two were similar; the children are like the people and the father is the head of the state. In highlighting the benefits of natural societal order and comparing it to the unnatural way of government, Rousseau persuades his audience of the benefits of the social contract theory.

In addition to comparisons, Rousseau's use of hypophoras allows him to emphasize the significance of his purpose and persuade his readers to support his social contract theory. He presents many rhetorical questions to his readers that make them see logic behind his theory. In his "Of Slavery" section, he proves that slavery is unjustifiable and inhumane. If a man wanted to become a slave to another he would be selling himself. But, an entire race of people do not spontaneously agree to such conduct. Rousseau then asks, "but why should a whole people sell themselves?" (63). This makes the reader think about the ugly truth behind slavery, as well as realize that the oppressed have their own wills as well. He also presents a very logical argument that all people, regardless of race, are born with total freedom and no one can take that away from them. The government during this time does not respect that, however with his social contract theory they would be a step closer to achieving it.

In combatting the issue of tyranny and corrupt government, Jean -Jacques Rousseau argues against the total power of the monarchy. He believes that the power to legislate lies within the people, and it is under their natural right to freedom. To convince his readers of this argument, he uses comparisons and hypophoras.  To him, That a more natural way of societal order is necessary.

TOW #21 - "President McKinley Gives His Reasons for Keeping the Philippines"

President McKinley 1903

When President McKinley decided to keep the Philippines during the year 1903, a heated debate arose throughout the country. Although the concept of imperialism was something that had been often considered part of the American tradition, the conquering of the Philippines was particular in that they were not granted the liberty and freedom other islands had received. President McKinley's pro-imperialists beliefs  primarily surrounded the idea that there was no alternative options because economically, diplomatically, and socially the U.S. was pushed in a corner. Realizing how sensitive and controversial the matter of the Philippines would be, he attempted to sway the public with his opinions in this speech by utilizing religious appeal and lists.

President McKinley heavily stressed the importance of helping out the natives. He makes many religious references and even goes as far as to say that after many restless days of contemplating the issue of the Philippines, God reached out to him and gave him guidance. This was a very relevant and effective way of swaying the public because many people during this time were very religious and very Christian. Henceforth, if God said it was okay to take the Philippines than it must be an honorable deed. He also makes it appear as though America was doing the Philippines a favor by attempting to uplift, educate and Christianize the natives by god’s grace. In his speech he even compares their plight of educating the natives to how "[their] fellowmen for whom Christ also died." Pro-expansionists often used this argument to justify their imperialism of the Philippines. This idea of the American godly-duty was well bought by the crowd, especially in the early days of imperialism.

President McKinley also utilized lists to make a more logical argument for imperialism. During this time period, there were several movements that fought adamantly against imperialism and questioned the extent on which they were acting for the welfare of others. McKinley likely felt that the best way to fight back against the backlash was to provide an argument, which is why he listed his reasons for keeping the Philippines. McKinley reasons that because returning the Philippines "would be bad business and discreditable" and "cowardly and dishonorable." He even mentions that they were "unfit for self-government--and they would soon have anarchy and misrule" if the Americans did not intervene. Although in current times it appears to be an absurdly egocentric thing to say, with the rise of Social Darwinism at the time it was a very valid argument that he made to his people. The idea of helping to unburden the islands and conforming them to American ideals to make them just like the Americans appealed to many, which is exactly why the Philippines were kept.

President McKinley was extremely open to his people on his contemplating over the Philippines decision. To buy public support on this severely controversial issue and provide justification for his motives and actions, he utilized religious appeals and lists. His beliefs that it was the American duty, responsibility, and even mandate from god to keep the natives is very clear in his speech.