Wednesday, February 23, 2011


I think that some of the major differences between Thich Quang Duc (The Burning Monk) and Mohamed Bouazizi is that Thich Quang Duc did it for his religion. I’m not saying what he did was right but in my eyes that is a little more acceptable but not okay. I think that Bouazizi did what he did because he was fed up with being treated the way he was. He wanted to be treated fairly and as an equal. He didn’t like how the government could just come up and take his scale and make him pay money for it back. Why he took those kinds of measures I have absolutely no idea. But Thich Quang Duc did it for his religion. He did not agree with the fact that the government could ban them from what they believed in especially because it was his belief. I think that he took to action like that because he wanted to show the government that people did not agree with this and it was there religion. So in both cases they wanted to show that the government had no right to do what they did but they were done for different reasons. I think that both of there messages were right but the way they were executed was wrong. I found it very interesting that the Buddhist religion does not believe in suicide but this act of defiance was classified as a way to call attention to Duc’s case, a religious suicide.

From the remains
of his cremation,
the monks recovered
the seat of Thich Quang Duc's
a bloodless protest
to awaken the heart
of the oppressor
at the crossing of
Phanh Dinh Phung
& Le Van Duyet
doused in gasoline &
immolated by 4-meter
flames the orange-robed
arhat folded in
the stillness
of full lotus
his body withering
his crown blackening
his flesh charring
his corpse collapsing
his heart refusing to burn
his heart refusing to burn
his heart refusing to burn

This shows that it was a terrible act and it shouldn’t have come to this that a man shouldn’t have to kill himself for people to realize that this is what some one has faith in and that this shouldn’t have been the only option to get people’s attention.

Discussion question (sort of): Do you think that it is okay for what the Monk did because he was doing it for his religion?

Thursday, February 17, 2011

OPTION 1/Literary Analysis of WWI.

  1. Communism. Communism is a type of government where there are no social classes. Everyone is treated “equal” and there is no wage labor or private property. Communism is sometimes known as a “political mainstream”. Communism refers to a classless, stateless society, one where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made in the best interests of the collective society with the interests of every member of society given equal weight in the practical decision making.

For more information on Communism visit this link:

  1. When my blood flows calm as a purling river,
    When my heart is asleep and my brain has sway,
    It is then that I vow we must part for ever,
    That I will forget you, and put you away
    Out of my life, as a dream is banished
    Out of the mind when the dreamer awakes;
    That I know it will be when the spell has vanished,
    Better for both of our sakes.

    When the court of the mind is ruled by Reason,
    I know it wiser for us to part;
    But Love is a spy who is plotting treason,
    In league with that warm, red rebel, the Heart.
    They whisper to me that the King is cruel,
    That his reign is wicked, his law a sin,
    And every word they utter is fuel
    To the flame that smoulders within.

    And on nights like this, when my blood runs riot
    With the fever of youth and its mad desires,
    When my brain in vain bids my heart be quiet,
    When my breast seems the centre of lava-fires,
    Oh, then is when most I miss you,
    And I swear by the stars and my soul and say
    That I will have you, and hold you, and kiss you,
    Though the whole world stands in the way.

    And like Communists, as mad, as disloyal,
    My fierce emotions roam out of their lair;
    They hate King Reason for being royal –
    They would fire his castle, and burn him there.
    O Love! They would clasp you, and crush you and kill you,
    In the insurrection of uncontrol.
    Across the miles, does this wild war thrill you
    That is raging in my soul?

Visit this link to be able to see this poem:

3. In the poem Communism by Ella Wheeler Wilcox it talks about how this lady, an American, does not like Communism. “And like Communists, as mad, as disloyal,…” This shows that the lady, Ella Wilcox, did not believe Communism was the answer. “When the court of the mind is ruled by Reason,…” This shows, accoriding to context, that she thought that Communism was wrong and that the right choice would not be Communism. “And on nights like this, when my blood runs riot
With the fever of youth and its mad desires,
When my brain in vain bids my heart be quiet,
When my breast seems the centre of lava-fires,…” This shows that in her heart she truly believed that Communism was a wrong choice and that it wasn’t what the people of the nation were supposed to do. More proof of this is that Wilcox writes (talking about communism “That his reign is wicked, his law a sin,
And every word they utter is fuel
To the flame that smoulders within.” She also believes that the Communist don’t know what they are doing and ignore the voice of Reason. “They hate King Reason for being royal –…” I think that all in all that Ella Wheeler Wilcox really believed that Communism is a bad thing, morally, and ethically.

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

The White Man's Burden & Imperialism.

1. Determine what Kipling means by "the White Man's Burden."
2. Does Kipling justify imperialism? How so?
3. Why might such a justification might be so appealing?

1. I think that he meant that the White Man's Burden means that since back then white men were treated better than any other race, Blacks, Hispanics, and even Women. Since they thought they were better than everyone they were in power and that if they made a mistake that they would be thrust under the bus and people would look toward them for leadership. That it was there RESPONSIBILITY to make the right choices and to lead them out of the things they had gotten themselves into. If the white men lead the people into a hole or into a dead end (metaphorically speaking) that it would be there job to get the people out of this hole.
Take up the White Man's burden-
The savage wars of peace-
Fill full the mouth of Famine,
And bid the sickness cease;..."
This quote shows that it was a tough job and it was a burden to be in a position of power but it was the White mans own fault because he had put himself above everyone else.
2.Yes he does try to justify it he says talks about it being part of the Christian religion and also says it is glorification.
And it talks about the good how it gives less disadvantaged people a way to live. And in the poem he trys to say about how the people with power will have problems and it won't be easy for them.
3. It seems appealing because lets face it. Most of us all want everyone to be equal and to have money and a nice family and a house and food to put on the table. By the way it is presented here it looks good but like many things it does not show the draw backs.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Self Reflection: Reconstruction Debate

  1. How did I feel during planning this presentation? Why did I feel this way?
    1. I felt nervous that we wouldn’t produce a piece that was of quality work and we would spend a lot of time bickering but I was also thought that we would be able to produce a monster debate. I felt this way because all of my group, including myself, have very different opinions and we could easily think our ideas were better than others ideas.
  2. How did I feel prior to presenting? Why did I feel this way?
    1. I feel awesome I think that we really proved our part and slammed the other side without being rude or mean. I think that I helped prove our side was right without proving Lincoln was a bad man.
  3. How did I feel while I was presenting? Why did I feel this way?
    1. I was very nervous but also confident before going. I was nervous because the group before had done a pretty good job and I was the last person to go so it was all going on me if I bombed it then I had sunk our group but if I did a good job then I had helped sink the other side. But I was confident in my slides and my stubbornness and good debating skills to help my group pull it off.
  4. What did I personally do well?
    1. Personally I think I did well trying to make people feel good about themselves and if someone was telling someone that something wasn’t a good idea or it was wrong I tried to make them feel good about themselves and I also tried to pull my weight and make sure people pulled there own weight.
  5. What did not go as desired in this presentation?
    1. What didn’t go as well as we thought was that people didn’t do their work and sometimes I had to it for them.
  6. On a scale from 1-10, how well do I think I understood the content? Explain.
    1. I think I got a 7.5 I think I understood most of it but there was definitely a lot of work I could have learned.
  7. How do I think my group members perceived me? Why do I think this?
    1. I think that at first they might have thought I didn’t do my work because I had a lot of work saved on my flash drive and I left that at my house so that was my fault but I think that once they saw what I had produced at the end I think they learned I was a valuable part of the group.
  8. How do I think the 8th graders perceived me? Why do I think this?
    1. I think that they thought I was a valuable part of the group and I that I did a good job because some if them said that in the shout outs.
  9. Knowing that I can only control how I act and react, if I could do this presentation again, what would I change about my actions to make it a more ideal experience?
    1. I would try not look toward Miss Bailin when something when something went wrong and try to be more like Erin when something went wrong just be able to handle it and tell the audience in a graceful way.
  10. What are my strengths in groups?
    1. I am a good debater and can be a leader when I need to be but don’t like being one.
  11. What areas do I need improvement?
    1. I need to improve not stuttering or saying “uh” when I present and I need to work on always having a plan B.
  12. What is the most important thing I learned about myself? Why is this so important?
    1. I learned that sometimes it is good to go with the flow and not use my ideas and sometimes it is good to be a leader you can’t be both at the same time. Ex/ You can’t be a leader but try to go with the flow when you’re the leader you have to show people what the flow is. This is important because when you’re a leader people look up to you and you always need a leader in a group because if you don’t everyone will follow everyone else.
  13. Are there any other things that I need to express?
    1. I think that I need to say good job to the other group and congratulations to my group that we all did a phenomenal job.

Friday, December 17, 2010

Reflective Blog Entry

Grown/Changed- I’ve learned that I judge people to quickly even if I don’t know them. I’m more observant and I’m more confident in myself and in my work.

Proud- I’m really proud of my book cover for the Red Badge of Courage, I think that was definitely one of my best projects. I thought that I had some great ideas for that project.

Challenging-I think the most challenging was the Thematic Causes of the Civil War. That was hard because we had a minimum of time that we had to have and it was a lot of time so it was hard to have that much time for one project.

Favorite- My favorite was the Stephen/Lincoln debates were so fun, because I was an evaluator and got to chill out with Miss Bailin.

Hopes for second semester- My hopes for the second semester is to get all my work done on time and to be as independent as possible. I want to keep producing quality work. Also I really want to have a court case or another debate for a large portion of our grade.