The Rebirth of Fun Fun Fun In The Sun Sun Sun!

Gasp! How long has it been? 2 months, 3 months? I am not sure. So much has happened in the past few months. Prom, graduation, but surely none compare to the resurrection of my humble blog. The grim specter of college calls me, but I have until July 25th to spend my time doing this and that. I have watched many films in this time, and can only hope to write reviews for them and publish them here. Plus, I have taken several steps in learning the art of voice acting. Overall, I have my hands full with projects. Let's hope I am not overwhelmed with them!

The PCP (Political Correctness Police) Strikes Again!

Apparently, the American flag is offensive to Mexicans, especially when Mexicans wear shirts displaying them! Now I'm no gun-toting, yee-hawing, tea-dumping Minuteman, but this is just stupid. If I wanted to offend Mexicans (which I happen to be), I would wear a shirt that says "Death to the Bean-Eaters!", not a shirt with the Stars and Stripes on it.

Kids Sent Home For Wearing American Flag on Cinco De Mayo


Edit: I decided to revisit this article because my brother bought a new insight that I foolishly overlooked. Although the boys definitely should not have been sent home, I have little reason to believe their motives for wearing the shirt were not solely based on patriotism. It seems the only reason they would wear stuff with the US flag on it on a Mexican holiday is to antagonize people celebrating their heritage. I'm totally against political correctness, but I also acknowledge that in this country, we have the opportunity to celebrate diversity, an opportunity many of our nation's more nationalistic citizens seem to not hold in high esteem (I'm not implying anything, just making an observation). Are the kids racist? No. Are they insensitive wingnuts? Maybe. The point is, no culture should ever have to be put down for the sake of another. On the same token, we shouldn't be so quick to push for unnecessary action towards those who may not feel that way, even if we strongly disagree with them.

Essays from Junior Year

Happy Cinco De Mayo from The
Frito Bandito!

I decided to celebrate by showcasing some of my written work from Junior year on here. Eventually, I'll upload some stories I wrote, but right now, I'm sticking to proper essays.

Here is the final draft of my end-of-the-year research paper for AP US History. It is aptly titled "Final Draft", with works cited included at the very end.

The Communist Party-USA’s influence in the civil rights movement was marginal at best, due to the emphasis of the Party on class conflict instead of racial conflict. The CPUSA did wield influence over the civil rights movement, particularly during the 1920’s. However, this influence was forgotten as the civil rights movement made itself independent, while the CPUSA continued to have significant influence in the more-class oriented field of labor. This division marked the turning point in the civil rights movement, in which it broke itself from the then-larger Marxist movement and established itself as a significant interest group all it’s own. With that in mind, it would be necessary to examine the Communist Party-USA’s role in the civil rights movement and why that influence declined.
Interestingly, the Communist Party-USA shared a fair portion of history with the civil rights movement. The Party viewed racism as an instrument developed by the ruling class to divide the workers and keep them from uniting in revolution. Thus, the CPUSA initially placed a strong emphasis on combating racism following it’s inception in the 1910’s and in fact was one of the pioneers of the civil rights movement. The Washington state branch of the CPUSA worked particularly hard to advance what it saw as Vladimir Lenin’s pledge to help all oppressed peoples, including those of color. It was through the Party’s toiling that the African Negro Labor Congress (ANLC) was founded in 1925 in order to give blacks a voice in labor since the racist American Federation of Labor denied them one. Through the ANLC, the Party was able to launch, “a newspaper, the Negro Champion, which reported on the key role of Black workers in workers' struggles…While the ANLC had few organizing successes, it showed the potential for building a struggle against racism based on workers power.” (Aaron Hess).Civil rights activist Bayard Rustin, who organized the historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963, stated “…the communists were passionately involved in the civil rights movement so they were ready made for men”. (“Bayard Rustin”) Numerous other civil rights activists supported the Party, such as A. Philip Randolph, Earl George and W.E.B. DuBois, who joined the CPUSA when he was 90 years old. In the field of civil rights, the Party certainly deserves credit, as few other predominantly white organizations dared to openly advocate the advancement of blacks in the 1920’s and 30’s. The CPUSA, on the other hand, constantly brought the issue before the American people, going as far as to publicize the Scottsboro Boys case and prompt action by the Supreme Court in opposition of the State of Alabama’s ruling against the accused. To further add credibility the cause of the Party, the CPUSA went out of it’s way to help southern African-American sharecroppers during the Great Depression.
The Communist Party-USA’s influence over the civil rights movement would decline due to occasional conflicts of interest between actions concerning race and actions concerning labor. Although many Communists were sincerely devoted to the cause of civil rights, it was no secret that the goal of civil rights was secondary to the more Marxist-flavored goal of revolution against the ruling class, evidenced by the quote, “…involvement was at times more about strengthening the workers’ movement than from a genuine interest in improving the lives of people of color.” (Shelley Pinckney). For instance, during the Second World War, individuals such as A. Philip Randolph organized marches on Washington DC to protest segregation in industry, while the majority of Party members opposed such moves because they hurt the war effort, particularly after the communist Soviet Union entered the war. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin himself directed the CPUSA to abandon its civil rights projects in favor of labor and industry-oriented projects. It was sentiments such as this that hurt the Party’s relationship with the hardline advocates of civil rights, such as the aforementioned Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin, who turned to other organizations such as The Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters for support in their activities.
Besides the fact that many advocates of civil rights felt they could not rely on the party for sufficient moves in that area, it became less desirable for them to be associated with the Party. During the 1950’s, white supremacists would try to prove links between key civil rights leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr., and the CPUSA, in an attempt to discredit the movement. One Southern newspaper wrote,”Right next to him [Martin Luther King, Jr.] was a comrade named Abner Berry, the correspondent of the Communist Party’s official newspaper, the Daily Worker”, (Sam Francis) about a demonstration outside the Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tennessee. Additionally, many whites feared that blacks were being encouraged by the Party to secede from the Union and form a separate “Soviet State” in the style of the USSR. Such notions were not totally without reason, as the CPUSA at first advocated an independent black nation within North America, before the Party adopted the policy of integration. To make things more difficult for the civil rights movement, J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI campaigned to make the CPUSA and the civil rights movement interchangeable in the hopes of hurting both causes. Regardless of the fact that the FBI ,”knew that the Communist influence within the civil rights organization was nil”, (Ofari Hutchinson) Hoover ordered for links between the two movements to be “discovered”, no doubt provoked by Martin Luther King, Jr.’s criticism of FBI policy. Given the irrational fear of the Party during that era, it makes sense many civil rights advocates felt it would be better to abandon the Party, meaning the few vocal advocates of civil rights within the Party left the organization.
Considering the above information, it is reasonable to conclude the CPUSA was an important part of the civil rights movement’s development. It was through the agitation of the Party that the civil rights movement was able to consider a viable option for which it could manifest itself. However, it should also be understood that as the movement developed, the need for the Party to be associated with the movement disappeared. This was particularly true after the end of the Second World War, as McCarthyism made it undesirable for anyone to be associated with communism, much less, the civil rights movement. Such a view would allow the Party to get the credit it deserves, but also keep it from being cast as the foundation of one of the nation’s most important social movements.
Works Cited Page
1. Pinckey, Shelley. "Chapter 5 Race and Civil Rights: the 30's and 40's ."
Communism in Washington State History and Memory Project .
2002. Web.28 May 2009.
.
2. Powers, Richard. "Martin Luther King Jr.: FBI’s Campaign to Discredit the Civil Rights Leader."
American History
(2003) 1. Web.28 May 2009.
.
3. Simkin, John. "Bayard Rustin."
Spartacus Educational
Web.28 May 2009.
.
4. Wormser, Richard. "Jim Crow Stories. Communist Party, USA."
PBS: The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow.
2002. PBS. Web.28 May 2009.
.
5. Murray, Hugh. "From Communist Policy to Affirmative Action."
Anthony Flood, Ofari Hutchinson
04 Mar 2007 1. Web.28 May 2009.
.
6. "Communist Party people: The secret history of Red America."
The Independent
31 Mar 2007 1. Web.28 May 2009.
.
7. Hess, Aaron. "Radical roots of the civil rights movement."
Socialist Worker 66322
Feb 2008 Web.28 May 2009.
.
8. Francis, Sam. "Abolishing America, Cont’d: Black History…or Red?."
VDARE Foundation
27 Jan 2003 1. Web.28 May 2009.
.
9. "American Red Groups ."
The Red Encyclopedia.
2002. Web.29 May 2009.
.
10. Rivera, David. Illuminism and the master plan for world domination.
Oakland: Conspiracy Books , 1994. Digital.

Here is a satirical essay I wrote for AP English Language, creatively titled "Process Analysis Essay".

A state of being that many seek to achieve but few do is that of popularity. Popularity determines many important things today, such as presidential elections and music television awards. Now with this guide, the average American can hope to become popular too. The key to being popular is making decisions, no matter how trivial, based on what others would think of your choices. This method is further covered in the following paragraphs.

To begin with, a lifestyle change must take place. Your tastes must be in line with those of society-at-large. Wearing tight or baggy jeans (interestingly, extreme styles of pants are preferred over moderately fitting pants), listening to catchy but lame music and watching sub-par, child-oriented musicals made by once-great animation studios are all activities that will increase your popularity. In short, you must marginalize your interests for the interests of your peers. That means the straitjacket and bellbottoms have got to go, no matter how good they look on you or define you.

Next, one must make popularity part of their essence. This entails going beyond appearing as others think should appear and think as others think you should think. Scholars versed in the study of popularity subscribe to a school of thought called “lemmingism”, in reference to the communal-minded rodents of Scandinavia. Like a lemming, a truly popular person must look upon their peers and become a carbon copy of them. An unpopular person may mimic the appearance and mannerisms of a popular person, but if they speak their mind, no doubt different from others, the deception will be revealed. But by thinking the way others think, one will not have to worry about being suspected of being unpopular.

Finally, before achieving true popularity, you must consolidate your decision. Unpopular people use propaganda and other black arts to break your will and reinstate the chains of individuality upon you. One of the most effective weapons the Opponents of the Zeitgeist will use against you is the question,”Is the value of popularity worth the price of surrendered individuality?” To defend yourself, you must respond to this query with the answer: yes. Yes, it is totally worth the price. Do not even offer an explanation, for it will make you vulnerable to further challenge by your social oppressors. It would be best to leave the argument where it is, with you firmly standing your ground.

Another essay from AP English Language, entitled "American Author Research Paper". It also contains a bibliography at the end.

A literary figure often overlooked in American literature is journalist Dr. Hunter S. Thompson. The main reason for this is perhaps his humorous style of writing, but in spite of this, Thompson has written inspired works over his long career. Thompson’s contributions to his field have through their profound depth exemplified by Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas’ autopsy of the American Dream, explicit honesty as in his article for Rolling Stone, “The Battle of Aspen”, which covered Thompson’s bid for sheriff of Aspen in addition to the shocking promises he made in the case he won, and subjective point-of-view that is a major component of his works, influenced the face of journalism.

A pioneer of his field, Thompson was one of the leading figures of the social and political movements, such as the New Left, that originated in the 1950’s and changed the United States in the 1960’s. Although the popular imagination still associates him with the movement, he had long distanced himself from it by its zenith in the late 1960’s, believing the movement had been reduced to lazy thrill seekers whom lacked the political and artistic convictions of the Beats he emulated. However, Thompson was by no means driven into the arms of mainstream society, maintaining a vehement distrust of the government and authority in general. He criticized the values of the establishment as much as he did the values of the hippies in his articles, in fact even more. His most famous work, Fear And Loathing in Las Vegas: A Savage Journey to the Heart of the American Dream, skews mainstream society, as exemplified by the decadent environment of Las Vegas (and by extension, consumerist America) and expresses sorrow at the failure of the 1960’s counterculture, which is exemplified by the novel’s “wave speech”. The middle of the novel has Thompson (under the pseudonym, Raoul Duke) write,”San Francisco in the middle sixties was a very special time and place to be a part of. Maybe it meant something. Maybe not, in the long run... There was madness in any direction, at any hour. If not across the Bay, then up the Golden Gate or down 101 to Los Altos or La Honda…. You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning…. And that, I think, was the handle- that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn’t need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting- on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave…. So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes, you can almost see the high-water mark- that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.” (Thompson, 96-97), in an effort to express his dissatisfaction. The “wave speech” succeeds in doing so, juxtaposing Thompson’s past in the liberal and politically-active San Francisco with his presence in the by-comparison conservative and conformist Las Vegas, Thompson’s epitome of the American Dream. Las Vegas finds itself victim of mischief and destruction, caused by “Duke” and his attorney, Dr. Gonzo (actually, Thompson’s friend, Oscar Zeta Acosta), who seek to attack American consumerism and society itself, culminating in the wreckage of a psychiatric office. Fear and Loathing continues to be read by scores of readers, and is critically acclaimed by many who did not grow up during the period the novel was written and thus not well-equipped to evaluate it. An example of this is given by journalist Tony Jenkins who interviewed Thompson, writing,” When I read the opening sentence of Thompson's classic book, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas for the first time, I knew that writing was something I wanted to pursue. I was playing drums in a small band at the time I read the drug-drenched book and like most kids that get involved in music; I wanted to be a rock star. Thompson’s musical style of writing and his erratic behavior showed me that I didn’t have to be in a band to live out my rock ’n roll fantasy…” (Jenkins) This fact gives credence to the notion that Thompson has had a profound influence on thousands of individuals.

In addition to his work’s deep meanings, Thompson’s style of reporting the truth, no matter how ugly it is, made his articles and novels stick out in the genre of New Journalism. His honesty knew no bounds, including the topic of himself. For example, Thompson’s article “The Battle of Aspen”, with the teaser “Freak Power in the Rockies” referring to the platform he claimed in his bid to become Sheriff of Aspen, Colorado, covers his campaign promises. Among these, he claimed he would legalize drugs (on a recreational basis; profiteers would be put into stockades installed in front of the town’s court house), demolish any buildings which obscured the view of the nearby mountains and take away firearms from the police force, but giving them nothing short of brute force in the case of emergencies. Such promises were unheard of in that period, if not obscene to many of the people Thompson sought votes from. This brutal honesty ultimately hurt Thompson, as the Democratic and Republican parties decided to join forces in order to prevent Thompson from winning, in addition to the majority of conservative voters being scared off by his unorthodox “Freak Power” platform. Additionally, Thompson hurt himself further by writing another article for Rolling Stone which detailed his plan to win votes, allowing his opponents to win. Another characteristic of this trait included his mean-spirited and sometimes vicious comments to others, often in vulgar terms. When asked by journalist Adam Bulger, a question about the music of Bob Dylan, Thompson retorted, “S***. You really are dumb. You have to listen to it and find out. If you think that, you really are ignorant.” (Bulger) However, his honest opinions and personality, as bizarre or rude as they were, established something of a legacy that continues to fascinate readers and critics to this day. Thompson has found himself caricatured in the comic strip Doonesbury, as the erratic character “Uncle Duke”, who has no issues with expressing his sentiments at any time.

Lastly, Thompson’s most significant contribution was his somewhat groundbreaking style of reporting. A simple idea, Thompson departed from the long-established convention of reporting news objectively, instead immersing himself in the story and using himself as a point of reference. This technique, dubbed “Gonzo Journalism” by Thompson, was used in many of his works in the 1970’s, including Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (possibly after the character, Dr. Gonzo) and Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, 1972. Although fellow liberal Tom Wolfe pioneered Gonzo in the sixties, Thompson was the one who cemented its place in the realm of writing. This style of journalism made use of sarcasm, humor, and even profanity, as well as a highly-subjective point of view. Although there are times when a journalist unintentionally engages in gonzo, such as war reporters, most gonzo journalists do so by choice. Today, gonzo has been supplanted to an extent by Creative Nonfiction, but the legend of Hunter S. Thompson and Gonzo, whatever it meant, remains the focus of many readers, young and old.

Bibliography:

1. Thompson, Hunter S. Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas: A Savage Journey to the Heart of the American Dream. 2nd. New York City: Random House, 1971.

2. Bulger, Adam. "The Hunter S. Thompson Interview." Freezerbox 1936-065703 09 2004 1. 19 Jan 2009 .

3. Jenkins, Tony. "Hunter S. Thompson." R K Puma 2003 1. 19 Jan 2009 .

4. Schickel, Richard. "The Mixed Pleasures of Hunter S. Thompson." Time 03 07 2008 1. 18 Jan 2009 .

5. Hahn, Matthew. "Interview With Hunter S. Thompson." Atlantic Unbound 26 08 1997 1. 19 Jan 2009 .

6. Thompson, Hunter S. "The Battle of Aspen." Rolling Stone 01 10 1970: 19-25.

Finally, I'll conclude with a comparison and contrast essay, entitled "The New Russian Order."

With the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990’s, it seemed that the largest republic in the Union, Russia would retire from its prominent role in the international scene. However, recent events seem to prove otherwise. Taking into account the Russian invasion of Georgia in August, and the new aggressive administration of Vladimir Putin and his successor, Dmitry Medvedev, this conclusion is not without rationale. Journalists and others have varying opinions on this series of events, although most agree that the revival of Russian interventionism will have profound repercussions on the world, creating what many consider a second Cold War. To further understand these conflicting view points, one must look deeper into the reactions provided by observers of this portion of international affairs.

A rather negative view of Russia’s new role on the international stage is widespread throughout the United States, considering that it spent 40 years face-to-face with Russia’s predecessor, the USSR. For instance, an article in USA Today, entitled Our view on the Georgia conflict: Russia invites new Cold War, declares that the United States must take a hard-line approach to Russia’s increasing activity. This article goes as far to say that the present Russian leadership is “trying to reacquire parts of their former empire while artfully stoking nationalist sentiment at home”, in reference to Russia’s takeover of Georgian territory. The Washington Times agrees with Our View’s opinion, stating in the editorial Russia Rules that “recent Western weakness will serve to only further whet Russia's appetite for dominating its neighbors.”

However, it may be argued that Russian interventionism is a positive thing, or at least harmless. Both of the aforementioned articles have comments that argue this position, with one person commenting on Our View that “From the Russian perspective, they have to deal with US imperialism and hegemony policies.” Different world leaders not only tolerate Russia’s new policies, but endorse them. Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez is one such leader, forging what amounts to a military alliance with Russia, and receiving Russian weapons and naval support. Another leader, Syrian president Bashar Al Assad also gives his support to Russia, as evidenced by his statement in the gulfnews.com article Bashar supports Russian military action in Georgia, “We believe Russia was responding to the Georgian provocation,” when asked about the Russian invasion of Georgia. One should notice that these leaders are known to harbor anti-American sentiments, recalling the polarization of the world during the Cold War between the East and West.

Considering the above information, one sees that the Russian leadership’s aggressive moves may lead to a new Cold War. The increasing imposition of its will on neighboring states, the chilling relations with the US and the West in general, and the drawing of allies hostile to the United States provides ample ground to hold this belief. In spite of the commonly-held thought that Russia would fade away from the world’s stage after the Soviet Union’s collapse, it seems Russia is returning itself to the center, alongside the United States. Whether this Cold War will end peacefully – or even materialize - remains to be seen.

Any thoughts and comments would be appreciated.