history 1

So Paige thinks that History cannot be trusted hun? Paige's statement is, in my opinion, an attempt to mold   history into her belief system because Postmodernism doesn't account for things such as absolute truths or concrete facts. This ideology seemed to be going very well for the poster modernist until they stumbled upon their own past which is nothing but concrete facts of things that have happened with archeological, oral, and written records to back them up. So Paige's argument is fundamentally irrelevant to history itself and only the erroneous consequences of a falsified worldview. Basically it cannot hold water. So what is Paige going to believe? That Hitler did not murder 11 million innocent people, or that the Roman Empire never existed? Regardless of who recorded these events it does not mean they did not happen especially with so much to support them such as hundreds of Roman ruins or abandoned concentration camps. Even if the survivors are the ones retelling of the Holocaust does that mean that they are liars? What Paige is saying is a truly narrow minded way of looking at the world and also incredibly rude, in what she is saying she is calling almost everyone a liar because everyone has experienced history; everyone is living what is moments away from being history. That brings me to my next point, everything around her is the product of thousands of years of history, or inner case billions. It is impossible to ignore the modern world that surrounds her and take for granted all that had to happen for this present world to come about. Since Postmodernists generally hold the evolutionist stand point then she of all people should be able to recognize the evolutionary process of humanity. Even if I believe evolution to be incorrect it still detracts from her argument considering that if she wants to count that as an accepted fact them she needs to understand how the world has evolved into its present state.
Paige really needs to take a history lesson or two in order to see the importance of humanity's past. History is a blessing to those who can understand and respect it. It is a method to decode our past and plan for our future. As Napoleon so famously said, "those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it." So if Paige thinks that history is irrelevant then she will have unfortunately go her entire life without understanding the complex world she lives in, what had to be sacrificed, the wars it took, the lives that were lost and countless other contributions that it took for the world to come to be the way that it is. To live in a world without that knowledge is to count one's self as ignorant, uneducated, unreliable, and ultimately a bad global citizen who is not helping our so called "evolutionary development" to a better society.
God has given man history as a tool to see his hand throughout all the generations as well as a lesson for future generations to see what works and what does not work. It is incredibly ignorant to deem history unreliable if the so called "winners" wrote it because that is ignoring the sacrifices of thousands who died and are still remembered to this day because of their actions. Both heroes and villains have died throughout all of history, and as a objective historian both accounts make up the ultimate account. Hitler was not a winner of WWII, in fact he committed suicide before the war even ended, yet his story is the foundation of what has been called the greatest crime against humanity, and why it should never happen again, just as the story of Colonists who won the American Revolution is the foundation of American History and why our country is the way that it is today.
History is in my opinion one of the most important subjects to understand because it directly effects who we are today and who we will become tomorrow, and to ignore or call it irrelevant is miss out on one of the greatest guide books to life that there is.

Economics 3

Why does Socialism not work? That is to say why doesn't it work to have the state own everything and then distribute the wealth evenly? Wouldn't it be good to have everything equal? Let's be frank, no. The consequences of this type of government is that if the states own all production and means of production then there is own private ownership of anything or free enterprise and therefore no insentive to work hard. Let's break this down. If I live in a socialist country and I work at a shoe factory and no matter how hard or how little I work I still get paid the same amount I am not going to bother working hard am I? The result of this is a weak, unprogressive nation. Nothing would ever get done. The other end of this would be that all the shoes would be crappy because if there is no other shoe businesses to compete with then why bother trying to create an awesome shoe that is affordable and effective? There is none, so in the end you end up with a country of lazy, crappy show wearing citizens. Competition is good because it ultimately create the better product and the better worker.
The problem with distributing the wealthy is again the same issues of there is not incentive to work hard and keep what you get if no matter what you do everyone gets the same amount. In capitalism there is an inceptive to work hard because the harder you work the more you earn, and if you are lazy, well then it shows.
A socialist nation claims that the people are in control of the economy when in actuality it is the government, this then puts too much power in the hands of the government. Perhaps in a utopian society this would work, but knowing that man is sinful and ultimately fallen means that when man is given too much power he can become corrupt and abuse that. This is consequence of soviet Russia in which all the power and wealth was given to the leaders, even though they claimed that everything was equal, but they knew that life was an obviously lower standard of living when everything was shared. So using their power in the government they did not follow their own rules of socialist government and lived lavish, wealthy lifestyles while the rest of society Russia was starving.
Another con to socialism is inflation. To use Russia again, during the soviet era there was huge amounts of inflation, meaning that money was worthless and therefore prices sky rocketed. People would have to bring wheel barrels of money just to buy a loaf of bread, people even wallpapered their homes with money because it was worth nothing. This is the consequence of a lack of free enterprise or competition.  Money only works because the citizens have faith that the government can back each amount they spend. Well if the government is unprogressive and the country cannot create any revenue because of failed products and they continue to print money it all because worthless.
Long story short; socialism is not as rosy and liberating as some might think, it is in fact an ineffective economic system that will only work if people are perfect, which people will never be, so therefore it will never work.

Final Poetry madness

The Dream Keeper

Bring me all of your dreams,
You dreamer,
Bring me all your
Heart melodies
That I may wrap them
In a blue cloud-cloth
Away from the too-rough fingers
Of the world.

Langston Hughes

I, Too, Sing America
by Langston Hughes
I, too, sing America. I am the darker brother. They send me to eat in the kitchen When company comes, But I laugh, And eat well, And grow strong. Tomorrow, I'll be at the table When company comes. Nobody'll dare Say to me, "Eat in the kitchen," Then. Besides, They'll see how beautiful I am And be ashamed-- I, too, am America.

Poetry madness round 2

Harlem

By Langston Hughes 1902–1967 Langston Hughes

What happens to a dream deferred?

      Does it dry up

      like a raisin in the sun?

      Or fester like a sore—

      And then run?

      Does it stink like rotten meat?

      Or crust and sugar over—

      like a syrupy sweet?

      Maybe it just sags

      like a heavy load.

      Or does it explode?

Poetry Maddness

 The Negro Speaks of Rivers

by Langston Hughes  

I've known rivers:
I've known rivers ancient as the world and older than the
     flow of human blood in human veins.

My soul has grown deep like the rivers.

I bathed in the Euphrates when dawns were young.
I built my hut near the Congo and it lulled me to sleep.
I looked upon the Nile and raised the pyramids above it.
I heard the singing of the Mississippi when Abe Lincoln 
     went down to New Orleans, and I've seen its muddy 
     bosom turn all golden in the sunset.

I've known rivers:
Ancient, dusky rivers.

My soul has grown deep like the rivers.

Ballet Shoes

Most people just watch the dancers when they see the ballet.

They watch them glide and float effortlessly across the stage.

A parade of lines and artistry.

But rarely do people take note of who really does all the work.

They miss the canvas souls that twist and grind into the hollow wood.

The limp patent leather that carries the dancers into every pirouette and arabesque.

or the faint shadow of rosin that follows the soul.

The audience never hears the clap of the wood whose sound is drowned out by the music.

Only is the extended leg seen, never the tattered soul.

It is quite unfair that the audience should only notice the grace and perfection of the ballerinas and never those who deserve it. 

Never are the blackened toes shown, only the crisp pink silk. 

All that dirt and sweat that builds up under the leather, never to to be seen by the enchanted viewer.

Death of a Salesman blog

As the play's main character, the play seems to mostly zoom in on the life and ambitions of Willy Loaman and his struggle to accomplish his life's dream; to be successful. However success can be defined in many shapes and forms, for Willy it is attaining the idealized American dream. The American dream can be identified as building something from nothing, working from the ground up to create a better life for oneself, something that will bring accomplishment and a legacy into the next generation. But Willy has a slewed relationship with this dream, no matter how hard he tried he has been a failure. He wanted to be a salesman, someone whom everybody knew and loved and could make a sale with just the flick of a wrist, but alas he is an old washed up has been who never made it. It bothers Willy that he is past his prime in life and has nothing to show for it, no money, no success, no happiness, no torch to pass his sons, not even hope for their futures. He believes  that being well liked and attractive can bring him comfort and security; superficial things that could take the place of true hard work. He consistently is in a state of delusion, lying to himself that is the next sale, or just one more deal that will set them for life. But the problem in Willy's failure is that he pursued the "wrong dream" as his eldest son Biff comments at his father's funeral, he wanted to be a salesman because he thought that was what the American dream was all about when he really should have been a mechanic or a handyman. Sure it was not an idealized job, but he would have been happy and far more successful. The problem with Willy and his dream is that he is trying so hard to be something that is simply not his purpose in life. He was a round peg forcing himself into a square hole, and in only reaped unhappiness.

Willy's struggle with the American Dream comes to reflect the overarching theme of the play, that happiness and wealth are fleeting things, and one cannot let their life come to be defined by superficial materials. Success comes from doing something that one loves, a lesson that Willy fails to learn. He also fails to keep his sons out of his same mistakes by reinforcing the same lies to them, that to validate one's life there must be tangible results. Miller was trying to suggest against society's ideas that there is only one way to success.What Miller illustrates is that every person has their own path, and not everyone's is a cookie cutter. He also warns against seeking society's approval and materialism in search of success happiness, which only truly comes from hard work and from a christian point of view, from following God's plan for one's life.

Of course 2012's American Dream is far different from that of the 1950's. Today the American Dream is that of starting at the top, there is no starting job or starting salary. Today all people want is to be handed everything. They do not want to have to start by working as a cashier, they want to start at the corporate level, or they want to immediately own the big mansion instead of starting with an apartment and working their way up. Culture today is obsessed with getting everything now, hence the obsession with technology where everything can be done at the tip of their fingers or credit cards and loans where they can have what they want now, and work for it later. It is a dangerous American dream that is the spawn of both laziness, false hopes, and major American debt. Yet it is also an entirely different economic market in which all industries are catering to those "I want it now" needs, especially customer service and technology. Yet there are still strong errors in this emerging American dream, what happens when all the CEO's leave and it is up to the next generation; will they have the proper training? Will have having it all now have prepared them to pay a mortgage? To run or start their own business? To climb the corporate ladder? It is a pressing question that may dictate the future of American society and its dream.