Class Participation #2

When connecting the two quotes and the three parts within each, I tried to connect them to each other. I thought it would make it easier to understand each part.

• Finding your country sweet is only a raw beginner 
• Axiological - value judgment
• You judge a country as sweet, your value judgment, even though in my eyes this just means you are naive and so is your judgment 

• Finding each country as your own is already strong
• Praxeological - relations to others and oneself 
• This is all about relations, and being able to relate to other people from different countries, and that makes you strong 

• Finding the whole world as a foreign country is perfect
• Epistemic - knowledge about the other
• Because you know the world is able to be discovered, and that you have the knowledge to know that you couldn't possibly know all about a country

Participation for 11-25-19

After examining this last section of The Conquest of America I feel that I have a greater understanding of the conquest, the intricacies behind the Spaniards motivation and in a bigger picture the connotations that exist between the “I” and the “Other”. Something that came to my mind near the end of our discussion was whether or not this is all human nature? Now I believe extreme cruelty and brutality is not natural, it is developed over time by environmental factors. However, to some degree I believe it is human nature to find the easiest path to our goals. For the Spaniards it was easier for them to categorize the natives as inferior, stupid beings who needed to be guided towards a European lifestyle or be killed so they could reap the complete benefits of the land of the Americas. This is wrong. Nevertheless, it made me think about this view of human nature and how it would apply to today’s world. People, in my opinion, have a very narrow understanding of how to interact with those who are different than themselves. Unfortunately, I think it is almost impossible for an average human to not categorize and fit people into their personal hierarchies. Projecting one’s core values and knowledge of how to do life onto others is something we all do on small or large scales. I think it almost inevitable to encounter another and not subconsciously place them within our personal hierarchies or try to project ourselves upon them.

If anyone wants to have a conversation about this or is confused, you know where to find me or comment below.  

Reflection #14

This week (aka Monday and Tuesday) has been a whirlwind, and it has only just begun. Trying to finish all of my homework before the break starts is incredibly stressful, but I know that it will be worth it in the end. Putting in all my time and effort in now will prevent any further stress buildup in the week following Thanksgiving. Finishing Todorov this week will ensure a much more peaceful break than if we had continued reading during this time. Although we have to prepare for the second simulation, my team has already met and gathered our thoughts on our strategic plan. Now the only thing left to do before the day of the simulation is to finalize any last-minute ideas and come up with possible counterarguments for the other teams. With that being said, there is not a lot to reflect on for this past "week". Our final discussion on Todorov was interesting but quite technical in the actual content. As PTJ said, the discussion could've gone on for another hour or so to truly unpack all of the material presented to us in Part Four of Conquest of America. I've mentioned in some of my previous blog posts that Todorov's writing is made much clearer to me when I am able to gauge my classmates' reactions to it and their own understandings of the content. Monday's class was a great example of that in that I might've viewed the quote at hand differently from those in my group. A lot of what I took away from the discussion was an inherent need to separate the actual character and their individual actions from their legacy or motivations. A lot of what was said revolved around these ideas, especially with the introduction of the three-axis. The praxeological and epistemic level made the most sense to me in terms of understanding the opposing forces of familiarity and the other. An entire conversation surrounding these two ideas could have composed another class session entirely, but that is just not the way the world works sadly.

Although I enjoy our time together in World Politics, I am so excited to be off for the next several days. Sadly though, I won't be returning to the great state of Texas but rather the garden state. My sister, cunning as she is, proposed that I spend the Thanksgiving break with her because she missed me so much. Later on, I found out that she is moving on Black Friday and needing help, so my mom offered my assistance without my knowledge. Come Friday, I will be moving boxes and furniture rather than shopping the sales or breaking out of my turkey coma. While I'm excited to see my sister now more than twice a year, I'll admit I will miss the traditional trip to my aunt and uncle's house with my mom and my other sister. Traditions break all the time, but I didn't expect this one to break so soon. I guess that is part of learning to be independent and growing up which is essential to the college experience. At least now I can guilt my sister into taking me to see Frozen 2 while I'm staying with her in New Jersey.

Cool finds

This week was cool cool. Yes, I know I repeated cool twice, but think this week was deserving of two. In World Politics we spent this week discussing two parts of the novel The Conquest of America. Our Monday discussion was the one I preferred just because I felt like I had more to contribute to the conversation. I understood what we were discussing and the plan was laid out before us. Whereas on Thursday the power was given to the class to decide how to structure our discussion. During this time, I found myself confused on what the question was that we were supposed to be analyzing, but as I am now looking back on it I realize that I need to be more adaptable to a classroom where the power is given to the many. Although I did not fully grasp what we were discussing and analyzing within our class time, I feel like I still understand the novel and the various concepts it was trying to impress upon me. Maybe that was why it was so difficult to have a substantial conversation about this part. As far as my resolution to learn to be more adaptable in a classroom, I have come to the conclusion that I have never been in an environment where the students are in charge within an academic arena. I know myself to be a very adaptable individual within the world outside of a classroom, but after Thursday could I truly identify myself as adaptable if I had trouble connecting to the purpose of that class? I believe it was a great learning experience for me on a personal level, and I now I will be prepared for the next time a class is held in this manner.

Besides the World Politics in my life, I found myself consumed by my other academic classes along with my personal time. I have been going to the gym more which is surprising since I usually hate gyms, I prefer exercising outside. However, a good friend of mine is my inspiration to go and she truly makes my gym time seem worthwhile. She also seems to have a particular talent of providing an exercise routine that makes me sore for two days after. Honestly nothing of extreme not happened this week, everything has been pretty similar to my regular routine: work on Monday and Tuesday, babysit Wednesday, my usual busy Thursday and Friday. But, on Saturday after buying some much needed winter necessities which unfortunately were not in stock within my California wardrobe; I decided to do work at a coffee shop in DC. Honestly, it was amazing. My time spent at this wonderful establishment made my whole week. I arrived there and the vibe was immediately one that I intimately identified with. The staff were extremely kind and I ordered some avocado toast and a chai latte. It was delicious! The avocado toast was made on toasted baguette with olive oil, smashed avocado, tomatoes, as well as microgreens. The avocados were smashed, but there were still chunky bits which is my favorite consistency for avocado toast. Personally, I truly love avocado toast and have had the pleasure of indulging in many different kinds. I have to say this avocado toast made top 5, especially if the café atmosphere is included. I was able to finish a lot of work and I did not even have to use my music, because they were playing my music out loud. Needless to say, I will be going back.

Woohoo week #something has passed!

Reflection #13 Worth

For this week's reflection, I would like to talk about the worth of people, and when I mean talk, I mean to go on a reflective route - letting my thoughts flow as I write. I have to put forth a disclaimer before I begin my thought process, I believe that all people have worth and should be helped, not everything I write is what I truly think just other people's thoughts.

Now that that's over with, let's start with the US. In the US, it is a common thought that all people on a base level are equal and therefore should have equal opportunities. One way that this idea is helped is by the fact that the social ladder isn't rigid, as there is no royal family or caste system. However, while that may be the base thought line, not everyone acts on it. People who might not be royalty in the US but have generations of wealth do not necessarily have that same belief. Is it not true that they are better off in life and have more rights simply because they have money? Could it not be argued that those who are wealthy are worth more? That those people are the true ones able to change the social order? It was not a Jewish slave that freed them from Egypt, it was a Jew who had been raised as a prince. The first African American president was not one raised in low-income housing, but one that had been raised by their white mother. These two scenarios can be seen as proof to some that they are worth more.

People in the US, as was seen in class a few weeks ago, believe that all people are worth saving, which implies that they are worth the same amount. However, is a small country with no significance worth the same amount as a country that has oil or some other important resource? Some people might argue that they are, yet others argue they are not. On a worldly scale, that small country has no worth, they are just a small country. A company will not invest in a country that has no incentives and going on a darker path, international aid will not be funded unless the country they give aid to have some sort of incentive for it like oil or something similar (Just a quick note, not all international aid is that way, some of it is privately funded, this is just mentioning the ones funded by countries).

I am switching gears yet again to focus on the individual person yet again. And this is just to conclude my thought process with some questions. Does a homeless person have less worth than a middle-class family? How would people from different countries view this question? And to answer them plainly: In the US as I mentioned before they wouldn't be worthless, while in a place like Russia they would be and would be seen as good for nothings that aren't doing anything with their lives.

I think this would be an interesting topic to debate in class and I hope to learn and study more about the worth of people as I believe it is an important topic for International Relations.

- Eli

#13 Reflection (ym)

     Since my reflection posts were what now called "class participation posts", I thought I want to do a regular reflection post for this week. Specifically because it was the toughest and definitely a rough week, and also because the semester is also ending.

     This week, so many final papers and essays were due, as well as exams. Different things were due everyday, which I do not remember anymore even though I am reflecting my planner. One of the things that is difficult for me from everyone else, is that I take a much longer time to read or write. Therefore, especially for World Politics, reading The Conquest of America for the first time in my life was (is still) really time consuming. Personally, it is one of the hardest books I have ever read. Half of the reason is because I do not know the history of the United States that well, but that is just a reason I am making.

     Reflecting this semester overall, I am not satisfied at all. I remember when I was still in Japan, I was thinking that I should not go hard first semester, because there will be so many other things to deal with, along with moving in and adjusting to the new environment. Int terms of classes, it was not the hardest within all of my academic career. However, I most definitely did not do my best. Although I tried my best in comprehending all of the readings and writings, I could have prepared for my classes better by spending more time for each of my courses. Because I knew that I am behind everyone else, I should have planned what I wanted to comment during class discussions so that I could have actively participated in classes more often.

     As terms of the blog, I really appreciate this space as a student who is struggling to speak up during class discussions. Blogs gave me the opportunity to reflect on my classes and some noteworthy arguments, and then do some extended research so that I can learn while writing these posts and actually learn outside of classes by myself. Also, of course, commenting on others' posts brought new insights to our perspectives which was really effective in opening and widening them to be a better learner.

     Time management is key in anything, but especially in college life. Being with my friends is stress-relieving; however it is actually stressful sometimes. That is absolutely related to my study habits; I tend to focus better when I am alone or one friend, rather than studying with one big friend group. Since I am not a person who studies in the room nor the dorm, I am usually in the sis building by myself at night. Reflecting this semester, I think I have a good balance where I was with my friends studying and studying by myself. However, for the next semester, I definitely should increase the time where I am by myself so that I can focus on my work more. One of the goals for the next semester, is to go off campus on weekdays and study at a cute cafe all day. I couldn't do this because I had classes everyday this semester; however, I have Wednesdays off next semester, so it is actually possible now.

     Next week, I am most likely to be writing about the simulation, so I am not mentioning about the simulation for now. I need to organize mom thoughts for future classes and blog posts, getting ready for finals as well.

#13 Class Participation Post (ym)

     In Part 3 of The Conquest of America, the most noteworthy part (for me during the discussion) was:
"La Casas loves the Indians. And is a Christian. For him, these two traits are linked: he loves the Indians precisely because he is a Christian, and he love illustrates his faith. Yet such solidarity is not a matter of course. As we have seen, precisely because he was a Christian, his perception of the Indians was poor. Can we really love someone if we know little or nothing of his identity; if we see, in place of that identity,  a projection of ourselves or of our ideals? We know that such a thing is quite possible, even frequent, in personal relations; but what happens in cultural confrontations? Doesn't one culture risk trying to transform the other in its own name, and therefore risk subjugating it as well? How much is such love worth?" (168).

     So shortening this long quote, the question that we really could not spend time discussing was:
Can we fully understand people and still hate him/her?, which can be interpreted as: What goals are we trying to aim to understand?

     When I first read this question, I thought it was possible to hate someone even though you know everything about that person. Because hate is a kind of emotion, and it differs among people. However, as time passed and I think about this question, I started changing my mind that it might not be possible to hate someone after hearing all of their opinions and thoughts. Instead of hating that person, I think people would make a decision not to understand about the person anymore because they are walking different paths in their lives, and they do not have to interact with each other because they can choose not to.

     Also, I can understand his point of religion and christianity, that he does not consider religion true for him, but it is universal and it is valid for everyone. Although I think that the power of religion in order to unify people around the world have decreased, christianity definitely had power to control people in the 1500s when the book was published. I think people are arguing that a universal value such as christianity is needed in order to treat everyone equally. Therefore, if some people do not believe in religion and christianity and do not belong within the universal value, the world cannot achieve equality. However, it brings an interesting question of whether people can be equal (at the time) with having some people being non-religious or even atheists. It was interesting how Locke's Letter of Tolerance came up during class mentioning about how atheists are unacceptable because it does not get along with their principles about equality. I cannot expand this topic since I do not know much about religion and christianity, however I strongly think that the power of religion have definitely decreased as time passes, especially because people started valuing their own personalities and their choices each person makes, and now there are different religions that are unifying different continents or areas of the world.

     Going back to the quote, I still sometimes question myself with the first part of the quote. Is it not easier to love someone who has similar identities because you can understand each other well? It was interesting to read how La Casas loves the Indians because they have a different identity, and that has to do with religion and faith that makes their identity.

Reflection #13

Discussions we've held on The Conquest of America and Todorov's overall argument have been quite hard to grasp, in my opinion. The baseline information is easy to comprehend. In other words, the Spaniards decimated the culture and population of the New World. But, going beyond these factual statements, it is much harder to understand the motivations behind these actions and their eventual justifications. I understand that Todorov is trying to steer us, "the reader" into agreeing with his ideas on the matter. However, digging into the text and finding these moments, I have found it to be particularly hard. Part of this problem might be found in the writing style of the era, which drastically contrasts from what we read on an everyday basis today. Historical texts and arguments take more effort than a typical story of fiction. They require that you pay attention to the background and context of each situation and how each figure approaches instances of conflict. Specifically, within The Conquest of America, I think it difficult to distinguish between the character themselves and their actions from their legacy that has been passed down. Columbus "discovered" the New World. I say discover loosely because the word takes on many different connotations. While Columbus might have been the first European to open up new land to colonization, he didn't discover it in the context of understanding the natives culturally. I could go off on a tangent about this idea alone, but I think I'll save it for our discussions of Part Four.

Overall, I think it is imperative to learn how to comprehend writing similar to Todorov. It takes more time and effort in general to grasp the concepts he lays out in his writing. Along with this, I think it would be imperative for us to conclude our discussions on Todorov on Monday by going into his final argument. His writing prompts us to take sides on the matter of Spanish colonization and discussing that idea further (especially with the dichotomies we brought up in class such as superiority/inferiority or self/other) would really help with individual assessments. I know that for myself, these discussions have helped further my critical thinking skills. Along with this, the way in which we conduct our discussions really help clarify these ideas discussed in Todorov's writing. Hearing from one other and each person's perspectives often make our conversations more engaging and helpful in the long term. This semester has flown by and I can't believe we are almost at Thanksgiving break. While I'm excited about the break I'm just a bit saddened that I will be helping my sister move her things in New Jersey instead of returning home for food and relaxation. Overall, the thought of the holiday season is quite exciting but before we can get there we still have a few weeks of stressfully preparing for finals before we can truly relax.

Signs: sleep, eat, conquer, repeat

The Spaniards did defeat the Indians with signs. However, this is not as simple as it may seem. They defeated the Indians because of their superior inter-human communication capabilities. The Spaniards culturally focus more on the art of warfare along with how to manipulate communication to further their objectives. On the other hand, the Aztecs’ cultural values focused on communication between the natural world as well as their deities. This gap in communication practices is one of the reasons for the downfall of the Indians.

The Spaniards were easily able to uncover what drove the Indians and then they used it against them. Gods and the natural world were held in high regard and the Spanish used this knowledge to their advantage by utilizing the skills they had learned about manipulation. On page 123 Todorov states, “Language has always been the companion of empire”. This quote proves true in the case of the Spaniards and the Indians. If the communication practices between the two peoples were similar there most likely would have been a different outcome, but since the gap existed it was quite easy for the Spaniards to take advantage of it. The empire built by the Spanish depended in part on their ability to understand and respond to possible weaknesses gleaned among the natives. The signs portrayed were manipulated by the Spanish for their own benefit.

Besides signs and language, the Spanish also had the advantage of advanced weapon technology and resistance to different diseases which they were exposed to in Europe. These advantages also played a significant role in their conquering and without them, I do not believe manipulation of signs would have been enough to take over the land. Simply put the Spaniards did defeat the Indians by signs, because of their ability to manipulate communication, the knowledge of which was derived from their cultural standards. Yet it is important to note that there were other factors besides communication which backed these signs such as the lack of illness, in comparison to the copious amounts who fell ill within the Aztecs, along with the Spaniards superior knowledge of weaponry. The bland statement of: The Spaniards did defeat the Indians with signs, seems unsupported, one must define the context behind the signs as well as acknowledge other factors which went into the conquering of the Americas.