Maus Comparison

One of the things I found extremely interesting in Maus, was the section of the books towards the end where Vladek and Artie picked up a black man and gave him a ride. You would think that after all Vladek went through and saw in the Holocaust, he would be one of the few people to not have prejudices, but he does. I find it incredible that he could be prejudiced against black people when he spent most of his life seeing his friends and family get tortured and be killed because of discrimination against Jewish people. I think it makes no sense at all, and it almost makes me wonder if anyone learned anything from the Holocaust at all. Thousands and thousands of people died in the Holocaust, and yet after if was over there were still strong amounts of discrimination and prejudices against other races. Obviously I didn't expect everyone to love each other right away because of this tragedy, but I thought that at least the survivors of the Holocaust wouldn't have any prejudices or discriminate against others after all their suffering (besides maybe the Germans, which is understandable).

Vladek wasn't nearly as bad as the Germans, but his comment said that "it's not even to compare the shvarsters and the Jews." By this I think he was simply saying "well our situation was different," meaning the situation with the Jews isn't the same as it is with black people. Maybe that Jews shouldn't have had to go through that but blacks should? Additionally, I think this part of the book was a scary thought. It is scary to think that something like the Holocaust could happen and not affect the behaviors or beliefs of one group towards others. But I also noticed how other things affected Vladek after the Holocaust, like how despite what kind of food it is or how old the food was, he constantly had to save everything just in case the Germans came back or there was another war. The Holocaust changed the ways people lived their lives, but apparently it still didn't get rid of the stereotypes and prejudices we still find today in our society.

Another thing I found really interesting was how Vladek was able to manipulate some of the things going on during the Holocaust. My impression of this war and genocide was that all of the Jewish people were brutally beaten, tortured, and killed with very few people who tried to fight back. But it never actually occurred to me that some people tried to cheat the system and succeeded. Yes I knew that people would try to hide our in bunkers or attics, but Vladek's cleverness was what I personally think saved his life. The fact that he used the people he knew to stay alive, get himself a job in the tin shop, then fixing shoes, both of which he knew very little or nothing about, shows that it was possible to use the resources around you. Then from there he tried to suck up to the German overseeing his duties by bribing him with food. And Vladek also used his skills in English to teach one of the Germans the language in exchange for better clothes and food. It was almost impossible to stay alive at one of these concentration camps but Vladek did. Vladek had a drive to live and he wouldn't give up, using whatever he could to find ways to save himself. I don't think this tactic could have saved all the Jewish people or even most of them, but it is sad to think that some could have some the same as Vladek and possibly survived through the Holocaust.

Maus blog entry

In reading the book Maus I found it difficult to find one part of area of the book that was especially moving because I felt the book and story as a whole was very moving. To read about what Art Spiegelman’s father had to go through to make it through the Holocaust and World War II was incredible. Not only did he get captured and have to live through the prison camps and death camps, but he got caught multiple times. What Speigelman’s father, Vladek, went through was truly incredible. As a story of survival, Maus also represents the best and worst of humanity. It is about people doing the best to survive and of others willing to risk their lives to help others survive and live on. This story is filled with many touching and emotional moments.
One of the most moving parts of Maus, at least in my opinion is, is that part where Vladek and his family were caught while hiding out in an attic. While they were waiting for the Nazis to ship them to Auschwitz, Vladek and his family devised a way to escape by paying for their cousin to help them. They were to act like they were working for Vladek’s cousin. Two by two members of Vladek’s family were able to walk out of the prison where they were being held. Unfortunately, Vladek’s father in law, who was very wealthy, was unable to escape. Vladek’s cousin took his payment but did not help him escape. In the end Vladek and his wife watched as his father in law was shipped off to Auschwitz and never heard from again. It was sad to hear the description and how it ended. “He was a millionaire, but even this didn’t save him his life.”
As I read that passage in the book, I wondered how difficult it must have been for Vladek to look up in the window of the prison on the day the prisoners were all shipped to Auschwitz and to watch his father in law react. They both knew it would be the end and they his father in law would never make it out of Auschwitz alive. It’s just amazing that people can be so cruel and unforgiving and that no one was able to help the author’s grandfather. It must have been very tough for Vladek to watch someone he loved go to die.
As I continued reading Maus, and the story of survival that it included and all the twists and turn that went with it, it sort of reminded me of a movie I once saw called “Life is Beautiful” (or La Vita e bella…it’s an Italian movie). It’s a movie about an Italian Jew who is rounded up and placed in a concentration camp with his wife and young son. The man realizes that he can help his son cope and survive if he makes it to be a game. He convinces his young son to play the game and that in order to win, the young boy must hide and make sure the Nazis do not see him. In the end the father does not survive, but by hiding the young son does and believes he has won the game and is reunited with his mother. It is a touching movie that shows the ways people can survive and how a father would do anything to make his young son survive.
The journey of that movie sort of reminds of the book in the sense that Spiegelman’s father had to do a lot of things to survive. He hid in attics and barns, paid people off, pretended to work for people; anything to survive and make it another day. The movie, “Life Is Beautiful” involved the father of the young boy telling his son to do various things such as hide, or be quiet, in order to help his son survive. The common thread is survivalism. Not everyone survived in each story, as witnessed by the death of the father in law in Maus and the boy’s father in “Life is Beautiful”. Both the movie and the book are also moving and powerful accounts of the Holocaust and what the Jews of Europe had to go through during World War II and how people will do anything to get by when forced to. Both the movie and the book are personal accounts or based on personal experiences and accounts of the Holocaust and the concentration camps.

Impact of Maus

Alright so the part Maus that is very prominent in my memory is just the inhumanity of the Nazis in a bunch of different situations. First when there was a child crying in one of the lines to wait to do something for the Germans, one of the Nazi picked up the kid and whacked him/her against a stone wall. This is hard for me to imagine that someone could be so violent as to do this, but I think that thing that makes it so vivid in my mind was the way that Art Spiegelman drew this part, with a big puddle of blood on the wall where the Nazi his this child against it. This nonchalant killing of children reminds me of a book I read in 8th grade for my German class, Night by Elie Wiesel. Wiesel is a Holocaust survivor who tells his story about living through Nazi Germany in concentration camps. One of the parts of the book that links with the part from Maus is that Nazi soldiers would take infants and new born babies away from their mothers, wrap them in blankets and then throw them up in the air and use them as target practice. Again, this is something that it’s very hard for me to believe that any human-being could be capable of this horrific crime. However, the whole Holocaust was filled with stories like this so I guess it’s not as hard to believe as it once was.


Another part of Maus that makes me think how horrible the Nazis were, was the ending part of the story when the remaining Jews from Auschwitz and other concentration camps were put on trains for days without food, drink, or being able to sit down in some cases. The Nazis would simple open the train door and tell them to get rid of the dead people and to clean up their waste to simply close the door again and to go for another few days. This treatment of the Jews as animals is absolutely horrifying.


When Spiegelman was discussing and drawing out the map of what the crematorians looked like in Auschwitz I realized that it’s hard to imagine the actual building that had this purpose, and just how much more impacting it is when you see these buildings in person. Two summers ago, with the field hockey team here at QU, I went to Germany, Austria and Italy. We played games at a bunch of different venues and sight-seed (is that a word?) at the same time. One of the places that we went was the concentration camp at Dachau. As I said before I took German in 8th grade and for three years in high school so I knew the main idea and the things that happened there so I was a bit prepared for what I was about to experience. However, nothing could have prepared me for going into the actual building where the crematorium was. In some of the rooms there were signs saying what the particular room was used for, and I’m pretty sure there were pictures of the rooms when in one case an entire room was full of dead bodies that had just gone through the gas-chamber. Seeing the ovens, and walking into the small-quartered gas chamber sent shivers down my spine when I was there, and now thinking about it, it makes me sick to my stomach. How can any human being think up ways of executing others they way that the Nazis did? I have absolutely no idea.

Education Comparison

Reading over the experiences of college students within communist Poland has certainly opened up my eyes. I realized the freedom that we Americans take for granted. When we are younger and asked to ponder our future there is a clear cut difference with polish students; we have a choice. In our democracy we are told we can become anything we want to become. There are no limits on our potential. It is disturbing to read that a simple freedom just did not exist for students in communist Poland. While reading through the packet I was able to spot certain similarities but of course the differences were shocking, and informative of the freedoms that are awarded to myself, and others in our country.
Like I mentioned before I had the freedom to choose what subject I wanted to study, and also where I wanted to school. A main denominator in choosing an American college is its price. When thinking about my own experience in choosing college money was a big issue. Quinnipiac is a very expensive college, and I was aware of the investment. However the communications program and the freedom to live on my own is what drew me to my school. Within the communist regime children there did not have the freedom to choose. They had the luxury to go to school for free but the debt created by not having the choice, and freedom does not make it worth it. In a way I pay for my educational freedom. It is difficult at times, but I would not have it any other way.
I recently was accepted to a study abroad program. Such programs enlighten students, and let them experience cultures that aren’t their own. When you study abroad you learn a lot about your own culture also. Particularly how your nation is received in other countries could be an interesting experience, possibly life changing. It is needless to say that having freedom is better than not having freedom at all. A major difference in communist Poland is not letting their students go abroad. Chances are if they ever went abroad they would never come back.

University in Communist Poland

In the introduction of the chapter on University education in communist Poland, I was briefly led to believe that this university education, given free of charge, was a rare positive in Polish citizen life. However, the very fact that this education was free of charge was a misleading characteristic. Because that education was funded by the government, the government could control university life. University admission was decided by the prospective student’s parentage and not his/her individual ability. Priority was given to the children of workers.

In the present-day U.S., I do believe this type of prioritizing does exist, obviously not to the same extent. University admission is not primarily based on academic success. Applicants with family or social ties to a university may be given priority over applicants who do not have such ties. In discussion on a topic very similar to this, a friend of mine had said “It’s all about who you know these days”. However, not every applicant can have such ties, and so previous academic success does come into play, ignoring other factors such as athlete priority, etc.
In communist Poland, the courses which would be taught at these government-run universities were chosen. Any courses which could potentially teach citizens of other governments and lifestyles were not allowed. Topics were limited and based upon the present needs of the country. At U.S. universities, there is a large variety of available courses. Students can choose their major of study, and choose (out of set choices) which courses to take to fulfill their requirements. To some extent, there are censored subjects. For example, the university approves of what history books can be used to supplement a history course. Many of these textbooks give only certain pieces of information, perhaps to keep the U.S. in a good light. Also, there are courses in which the student has to take, such as core curriculum, with the purpose of furthering basic student knowledge. In my opinion, this is what high school is for, and because high schools are deficient in completing this task, university students must spend more time doing core curriculum and less time specializing.

Overall, U.S. students invest their money into a university and in return, get a degree which allows for more access to profession. We have many choices, as in a university, major, etc. The abundance of universities allows for more access to education, even though the application process may be a little unfair.

Comparing my Experience to the Experience of College Students in Communist Poland

After reading about the university experiences of young students in Communist Poland I realized how different my experience was to theirs. I was able to find some similarities; however, the American experience of today is not quite so drastic. What primarily struck me about this excerpt was the selection process for admission into the Polish Universities. Your admission depended almost entirely on your social category regardless of knowledge and skill. The author states, “Now they were told that the enrollment procedure at universities and polytechnics gave priority to the sons and daughters of workers, regardless of their actual knowledge or abilities. This was called the principle of historical justice” (116). Following the children of workers were the children of peasant farmers but not the children of richer farmers because they owned too many hectares of land which did not coincide with the values of Communism. A student’s whole family tree was examined before admission was granted to make sure candidates from incorrect origin were eliminated. In America, a student’s credentials such as GPA, SAT scores, national honors society, sports, community service, and club membership are all taken into consideration when deciding whether a student should be admitted to a university or not. A student gets to choose which universities to apply to and once accepted which university to go to. The ability to choose is not a luxury college students enjoyed in communist Poland. I do believe, however, that social classes still play a role in the college admission process today in America. Schools can be very costly and typically private schools cost more than public schools. Certain schools attract middle class and upper class students based on the high cost of tuition. It is not uncommon for students to receive financial aid but in the more expensive universities a large number of students have similar social backgrounds. Admissions representatives may not examine an applicant’s entire family tree but they do still have an agenda. On a supplement application I had to fill out during my senior fall I was asked how much my parents were willing to gift to the school and how much my grandparents were willing to gift to the school. Questions such as these on applications shows that financial status does play a role in the admissions process even if it is minimal.
Another part of this excerpt that caught my attention concerned libraries and textbooks. The author states, “The situation was further aggravated by the fact that libraries had been destroyed during the war, and the intentional isolation of communist countries from the rest of the world resulted in a lack of modern teaching materials and excluded academic circles from the normal international circulation of ideas” (128). I go to school in the age of globalization and to me it seems quite challenging to study a subject without the comprehensive amount of resources available to me. Relying on lectures and the few old text books that survived the war hinders the learning process especially since Poland was left out of academic circles throughout the rest of the world. New ideas and technologies were not available to them. In that sense there are no similarities between the experiences of the college students in Poland and my experience.

Choice: An American Luxury

Undoubtedly the most major difference between students in the United States and students in Communist Poland is the ability to choose. I chose what schools I wanted to apply to, what I wanted to major in, what school to go to etc. Like the Polish student, I had the option of doing military service. Because I am an Israeli citizen, I was called up to the army at the age of 18, however due to my American citizenship I was able to come to school instead.
One of the things that was really interesting to me was that the Polish government actually paid for higher education. Considering the fact that most college students in the United States pay massive amounts of money and will be in debt for years, I was envious of this fact. However, that was about all I was envious of, as the Polish government also chose a certain number of Poles who would attend university, where they would go to school and also what they would study. This just really made me feel that a lot of us in the United States take for granted the tremendous amount of freedom that we have.
Polish students had to have been extremely anxious about this entire process, even more so than students going through the college selection process here in the United States. The government looked at everything from the profession your parents hold, what class you belonged to and whether or not you had family abroad. These are all things that a student cannot change or make an effect on. In the United States, we decide how hard we want to study, influence how well we do on the SAT’s and have to personally write our essays. The Polish system left no responsibility in the hands of the student at all. It is also almost humorous the order of “classes” considered for admission, the children of independent professionals (doctors, lawyers etc.) were considered to be at the bottom of the list!
We here in America are notoriously known around the world for not appreciating what we have. The Polish student would have definitely been jealous of the way that Americans are selected to schools, and for that we need to show a little more gratitude. The right to choose what you want to do is just a common fact in the United States, that does not take any thinking about, but in communist countries, such as Poland was, students did not have this luxury.

America/Poland Education Comparison

Upon first reading about the college experiences of young students in Communist Poland, I was really struck by how dissimilar they were.

I remember it was my junior year of high school when I truly started my preparation for college and the search for the right fit. I was taking a class for preparation for the SATs (a major factor in many schools decisions to admit or deny students) joining tons of clubs to spruce up my resume, reading books of the Top Schools to decide which campuses I was going to take a tour of and visit and all the while trying a little harder in school to boost up my GPA. After researching and visiting what seemed like 20+ schools, I had made a list and started the application process and after a few weeks and a few freak-outs over my admission essays, the fees were paid and the applications sent. With that came the long and grueling waiting period began. I decided to go to college because, in all honesty, it is basically the norm for what you do after college and I know that with the lifestyle I want to lead when I’m older I’m going to need a degree to get a good job and make a lot of money. Granted there are some who enter the work force or go into the military, the vast majority of young adults graduating from high school go on to some sort of college and further their education. I was in no way joining the military and I found myself similar to many young men in Poland, ‘university’ provided an aversion towards military services. This however, was the only similarity I noticed.

A major difference I noticed and was really shocked by was the enrollment procedures of the education systems of Communist Poland. Priority was given to the sons and daughters of workers, regardless of their actual knowledge or abilities, while at the very bottom of the ladder were the sons and daughters of “independent professionals” such as doctors and lawyers. The article said that “for their applications were as a rule considered last of all and turned down” [about the sons/daughters of lawyers and doctors.] It definitely is not like that in the US. I feel that in the US, the sons/daughters of doctors and lawyers basically can go to any school they want. If you’re parents are powerful, rich, or know someone with pull at a school, then that the student is basically a shoe-in to whichever university they please. If a student has ties to a University the likelihood of them being accepted is greatly higher than those without ties, especially in Ivy League schools for example, which is where a lot of Doctors/Lawyers go to school, so it makes sense for the children of successful people to be able to get into schools more easily which is the complete opposite in Poland. None of that would matter in a Communist Regime for the sole reason that a student’s parent was a professional. In Poland “priority was given to the sons and daughters of workers, regardless of their actual knowledge of abilities,” this is just so bizarre to me and wrong. Although it is true that if you have a parent working at a college you can basically go there, and for a lot cheap, you still have to have somewhat of the intelligence level of your peers.

A second group of ‘candidates’ for ‘university’ was made up of representatives from the working class. Something I found interesting about Communist education was that the students had no say in where they attend school or what they attend school for, regardless of their social status. I am the product of a ‘middle working class’ family, and I would be completely angry and upset if I did not get to choose where I went to school and what to major in. I’m a Finance major, the business world has always been something I’ve found interesting and I’ve really enjoyed a lot of the classes I’ve gotten the opportunity to choose to take, I couldn’t imagine going to school for something such as Nursing or Education.

Something that also struck me in this article was in the ‘remodeled studies.’ The communist universities set out to eliminate English, French, Italian and Spanish culture and literature from the curriculum in an attempt to ‘protect students from ideologically alien contents,’ and instead use the ‘linguistic enunciations of Stalin.’ I couldn’t imagine having to basically take ‘Stalin’ as my foreign language because others were banned by the government. Something I also found interesting in this section was about the ban on textbooks, and the destruction of libraries and how students had to rely primarily on the lectures alone, which didn’t include certain achievements of philosophers and sociologists because their ideals were rejected. I couldn’t imagine not having a library, ironically where I am not and where I do 95% of my work, or have text books and have to sit through lectures only.

We really are lucky to be able to have so much freedom in our country, to be able to choose our school, choose our major, choose (some) of the classes we get to take and basically create our own career path, which students of Communist Poland were never allowed to do. It really puts a new perspective on how much I take for granted, we get to attend college because we want to not because the government forces us to.

My education V communist Poland (this one worked)

            One would expect to not find many similarities between attending school in communist Poland and in a suburban town in Connecticut but I can see many similarities between the two.  Yes, of course I can also see many vast differences but I will address them later in this blog. 

 

Communist Poland used a set of strict guidelines to allow admittance to their universities.  The first group was family of university workers, regardless of their intellect or abilities.  I know this may not happen on the same scale at modern day universities but I have defiantly seen favoritism to family of workers and athletes.  I know at Quinnipiac that family of University employees have a much easier time getting into the school and are held to lower standards then non-family members.  The admissions department will overlook a family members shortcoming to be loyal to their employees.  This also occurs with student athletes.  Thousands of athletes are admitted into universities because of their athletic skills and not their intelligence.  It would seem that these two groups of individuals are first priority over other potential students at universities today as well as communist Poland.  By no means am I saying that the admissions process is the same for both time periods because at Quinnipiac today no student would be rejected because they own a lot of land or their parent are entrepreneurs.  It almost seems the opposite, because Quinnipiac would like wealthy people attending their institution.  Another difference would be the “elimination of those of incorrect origin,” stipulation that universities would use to reject a student for any reason they see fit.  In communist Poland they would use this rule to turn a student down because of political views or parents who had served in the military.  Today this would be considered discrimination and the Universities are not supposed to ask a student about their religious or political views.

 

            In communist Poland, Universities used their control over learning materials to alter the student’s viewpoints.  It was a rarity for a student to find books printed after the 1930’s because they were afraid of student’s learning righteous information.  By limiting the materials available to students the communists were able to isolate Poland from other countries.  I think this is the largest difference between communist Poland and my experience as a student.  Ever since elementary school I was taught to use the Internet, browse our large brick and mortar libraries, and seek out third party resources.  I never felt as though my teachers were hiding information from me or wanted to limit my ability to learn.  If my school didn’t have the proper resource they would order it, or find a way for me to be able to read it.  I could not imagine utilizing books decades old to conduct research from.  Another foreign idea is that at the congress meeting very few students would speak and those that did were in agreement with the congress.  Students that questioned what they were being told were kicked out of school and lecturing.  All of my English courses at the university level asked me to think critically and question what I was reading at all times.  I would receive a high mark on my papers if I were able to step away from the situation and fabricate a new way of looking at it.  How did communist Poland ever expect to grow if they did not foster critical thinking?  Communist Poland wouldn’t have existed in the first place if it weren’t for critical thinking.  The country could only remain static for so long, maybe if they allowed some free thought it could have flourished for longer.

            

My education V communist Poland

U.S. vs. Poland

After reading the article chapter about University Educational the Grip of Ideology and Poverty, it made me think about my own college experience. After reading I saw many common traits between my college experience and those of the students in communist Poland. One of the topics that the reading discussed was how the universities had a specific acceptance procedure. From my own college experience I can say that this is true for many schools.

In the article it talks about how since Poland pays for their citizens to go to school, they control who get to be accepted into the universities. They start by looking at where the young boys and girls family class. They give they first accept those young students who are from families of workers. The next in line would be the sons and daughters of peasant farmers, and the list goes on and on. From my experience, this is along the same line of how universities and colleges chose their students. Quinnipiac it self is a perfect example of this, looking around the campus and observing the students a person can automatically tell what type of student Quinnipiac chooses.

When a student in the U.S. applies to a university or college, that school looks at where they went to high school, where they live, their race etc. From that the university can tell what types of family the applicant comes from and much more. From the information on the application the school then hand picks that they want to be in that school. More then often they student does not get into the school because of their grades or what they have done through their high school career but, they get in because of their family background, or financial back ground. This is exactly what I see when I walk around this campus; our school pulls from CT, MA, NH, and NY, with the acceptation of international students. A majority of them are from well off families and come from a privet or well-respected high school. The majority of our campus is made up of white students from middle to upper class families.

But this is not only true for Quinnipiac, universities and colleges around the world are giving high priority to those who come from certain families, and backgrounds. It has been my experience that schools do hand pick their students and it many not be because they have the best grades or are high achievers but because of where they come from and who they know in life.

US students vs. Polish students: Freedom of Choice

In America, education has become a priority for the new Obama administration. a university education is now more affordable and easier to attain with grants and loans. today, the US government controls state universities through grants/oversight, yet there exists many private universities in America allowing many options for students to choose from. however if a student in america decides to not go to college, many other opportunities exist for work. however, in Poland during the 1950's the communist government was in control of every aspect of life, such as education. this tight grip on education left young Polish students with only two options after highschool; join the military or go to college. Just as in America, a university education in Poland was a goal for all young students since the military and low paying jobs were not as promising. The communist government realized this and took advantage of the high interest by implementing stiff government control. a university education was made a privledge that only a special few were allowed to attain. however if chosen by the government to attend the university, the tuition would be free. however this gift by the polish government had strings attatched. students were unable to chose their area of study but rather the government chose for the student. in this way the government hoped to fill positions it was lacking. in the US, students are able to chose thier area of study, however influences do impact students. the availability of jobs and the wages as well as parents can influence a student to chose an area of study they dont really enjoy. in 1950's Poland, education was also equal with Universities all under the government's control and no other 'private' options. While in the US today there are state schools and private/ivy league schools where only those with better grades, money, and/or influences attain a 'better' education. however there is a vast difference to Poland 1950's to the US today where freedom of choice exists. however both countries lack freedom of opportunity. it is the dream in the US today that every person will be eligable and capable to attend college, where wealth and influence is not a factor. in this new dream exists hope for a smarter and more fulfilled people in the future.

hardships of attending "university"

I never realized how fortunate I am simply being granted the opportunity to go to Quinnipiac University or any school, for that matter. Everyone in the United States is allowed to attend college even with a GED. Financial aid and federal grants allow even the poorest people to make a better life for themselves.
In the beginning of the 1950’s Polish, students wanted to go to what they called University, only because they didn’t want anything to do with the military. This surprised me because I always thought how lucky people were in other countries, where the government pays for their education. University did get the students out of having to commit themselves to the military but, I had no idea how many negative factors were also involved with a free education.
On the positive side of this free education is a much more fulfilled, and exciting life. It was a much better opportunity for these kids than the military. They could live in a different and more interesting place and have a good career after attending. This sounds much like our experience here.
Along with all the positives there are many downsides to getting chosen to attend school. There is an extensive application process. I don’t know that you’d even call it an application process at all, because the government basically digs up all the skeletons in your closet to see if you check out. I mean it is fair, after all. Since the government pays all tuition they make the rules. I’d say the negatives outweigh the positive.
Some of the regulations to get into University include “the principle of historical justice.” This meant that workers of the institution and polytechnics were given first priority to attend. The next people that were seen as priority were grouped in the “worker-peasant alliance.” No rich landowners children were given priority, just the middle class and what they called “paupers.” After the many classes of people that could get into the “university” there was the chance that the government would turn up some skeletons you hoped would never come up again. If the government finds out that you had lied about anything with your past you would be disqualified to attend. Last but not least, people who you consider friends could turn you in which would leave you expelled from the “university” as well.
The last part of the article that really made me upset is the fact that the students who were actually chosen to attend university were forced into certain fields of study. Where ever there were openings to help the government that’s what the students would learn. If I was forced into studying something I would go out of my mind. It makes me sad because I could never imagine throwing away what I am most passionate about.

USA Student v. Communist Polish Student

After reviewing the reading about Communist Polish students, it is crazy to think about the things we, as US students complain about! There are so many differences between the two students, yet with a common thread running through each of them- the desire to learn.
Keeping mind that there will be obvious differences because of the time periods and environmental changes…
One major difference I noticed right away about Communist Polish students and US students was that “university” in Poland was F-R-E-E for students! At first glance, FREE compared to $43,000 per year seems like a really great deal. Then I read on. Students in Poland during Communist times were not given any choices, at all. They were lucky if they were even CHOSE to be a part of the university. That’s right- they didn’t even get to enroll themselves. The state, as high and mighty and they believed themselves to be, CHOSE who gets to go into college and who doesn’t. There was no ‘ buying your way into college.’ The system for doing this is ridiculous and almost backwards from the way it works in America. It seems that the better your parents are doing in Poland, the more successful they are- the worse your chances [ if you even get a chance] are for being permitted to attend a university. On top of not only having your chances ruined, if your parents were successful – ie: doctor, lawyer, entrepreneur- you were often even PUNISHED because of this. The state would send these kids off to be slave labor in coal mines or sometimes in military camps. In Poland, the children of parents who were poor, rural farmers had the best shot of getting into a college. In the United States, [ for the most part] every student has the chance to be admitted into college based on their intellectual and personal abilities. It has nothing to do with who your parents are or how much money they make. – Although let’s be honest, to this day some wealthy families across the United States often make very generous “ donations” to elite universities in order to have their child accepted. Politics can definitely play a role in whether you’re accepted to a certain university in the US, but for the most part, if you graduate high school, you can be accepted to at bare minimum a simple community college or technical school. The more effort you put in, the better the school you can attend. It’s a fairer playing field.
Another major difference that I noticed between a Polish student and an American student is the resources available to each. Students in Poland rarely have a materials like textbooks available to them and solely rely on attending class and listening to a solely verbal discussion from the professor and reading their own hand written notes in order to learn anything. In the United States, students have textbooks provided all over the place, from being able to purchase them from hundreds of vendors, to taking them out in a library. US students are also able to use computers and are given pictures, videos and even live conferences to enhance their learning experiences. Polish students were banned from having outside knowledge of Poland or being “abroad.” In the US, diversity is promoted and studying abroad is highly encouraged! It is crazy to think about how I complain about how expensive textbooks are [ which they are, I’m not discrediting that] but meanwhile students in communist Poland were not even allowed to purchase them. It is mind boggling to think of the things US Students take for granted and yet STILL find a way to complain about them while students in other times and in other countries were not given nearly the same opportunity of growth and development.
Overall, I think that reading this article has made me a more grateful student and I have begun to realize the true freedoms I have as an American student and will try my hardest to appreciate each one a little bit more.

American Universities vs. Communist Poland Universities

It was interesting how many differences there are between the Universities in the United States and the Universities in Communist Poland. Working in the admissions office and Quinnipiac has given me a different perspective on school and getting into college. I get to see how people act towards getting into college and also how the admission counselors react to those applying for school. The first part of chapter four caught my attention right away. I can't believe that there is actually a system of how students can get into college based on what their parents did as careers. That means nothing about the student themselves. This bothers me because it isn't the parents who are going to the universities, it is the students. On the application that students have to fill out in order to come to Quinnipiac they have to disclose what their parents occupations are. I've never thought about that until now but I am just about positive that it has no major effect on the students acceptance. Young teens are the future of tomorrow and universities in Poland should be focusing on their abilities of those students and what they can offer to Universities. I do disagree with their system but I found it interesting that parents occupations such as lawyers and doctors were considered miserable and automtically turned down. One might think the students of those parents would be sought after.

Another difference that I noticed throughout all of chapter four is that communist Poland had a strong control over the universities. I feel bad for students who attend Universities in communist countries because they don't have the types of simple freedoms I have in the United States. I take advantage of going online and ordering my text books before class. If I don't have a book I need I simply go to the library. The Polish Universities struggled to get new text books and many of the libraries had been destroyed during the war. When I think about not being able to get a text book right away I automatically think of other options. I can use whatever means in order to get the information I need. In communist Poland they had to wait for those textbook and they could only learn what they textbooks taught which consisted of mostly, "ideological gibberish." If a part of Quinnipiac was destroyed I know that it wouldn't take administration more than a day to figure out what they had to do to get it fixed. Everything here is done so quickly and without hesitation. I definitely take it for granted how quickly and easily life happens at American universities.

It seems that education is not top priority in Communist countries. Any part of education is deciede from the communist themselves. They choose who goes to college, they choose what is taught at the universities, and they decide what the students do. Students in the United States have so much potential and are able to demonstrate what they are made of. The opportunities are endless for students here. It's frustrating to know that students in communist Poland have the potential of any American student but they are held back by the rulings of the communist party. I would never want to learn how to deal with the rulings of my University if I were unhappy with them. I am greatful for the way Universities are run in the United States

Polish Educational Opportunities vs. American Educational Opportunities

There are many different aspects of the life of the student in Communist Poland and the life of a student in the United States in present day. The obvious difference between these two time ways of living is that they are in two different time periods. Another difference between the people living in Communist Poland and the people living in the U.S. today are that in Poland if you were a part of a successful family, you would not be one of the top candidates to go to school in Polish schools, or to go to Polish universities. In the packet the author states, “At the very bottom of the ladder were the miserable children of the so-called “independent professionals”----that is, doctors and lawyers with a private practice---as well as small shopkeepers and craftsmen with their own workshops. They were miserable indeed, for their applications were as a rule considered last of all and turned down” (116-117). So the children of these well-to-do parents were considered last to go into schools. On the other hand, in the United States these children of well-off parents, especially doctors and lawyers are more likely to be accepted to schools because of the wealth of their parents to be able to pay for their education. I am not the daughter of a doctor or a lawyer, but I my parents are members of the middle-class. It took me a while to get my mind around the fact that if your parents were successful individuals that that would negatively affect their children’s futures. In America, it’s typically the more money you have the more successful you will become. This one aspect of life in Poland and America is in complete opposition: black and white.


Another difference between Communist Poland and modern-day America is the fact that in Poland a ‘family business’ or passed on career would not be allowed to occur. If your father was an architect and you also wanted to be an architect that idea would be thrown out by the communist government. It says within the packet concerning the education in Communist Poland, “Thus the Cracow Academy of Fine Arts rejected the application of the granddaughter of a famous painter, stating that ‘the party will not lend support to the formation of artistic dynasties’” (119). This is a very commonly practiced career path that children take in America. If a child has been brought up in an environment where he/she is around their parents work, there is a very good chance that that child will want to do the same occupation as their parent. For example, both of my parents are teachers. My father works at the local high school as a Career Counselor, and my mother works at the local college as a professor of nursing. My ties with education go even further than my immediate family and into the fact that my aunt is a math teacher at my high school and my uncle is a social studies teacher there. If I was told that I could not become a teacher, which is what I’m going to school to become, I would be crushed. I feel that I have a calling to do this, and if I wasn’t allowed simply because my parents already ‘had dibbs’ on that occupation for my family I would be extremely upset.


In many ways I feel very sorry for the children and students in Poland that were not given the opportunity to go to college or pursue the career of their choice. Reading articles like this one really makes you appreciate the wonderful gifts and opportunities that we have here in the United States. It makes you realize how much we actually take for granted.

Communist University blog

As I read about the experiences of the Polish, and in a broader sense the students at universities in Communist countries, I am quickly struck by how different their experiences are from mine. I have never done much reading about universities in Communist held countries, but after reading about these schools and how they functioned and who went there, it all made sense. It’s a strictly communist system that in theory looks like a good idea and appears to work, but in reality, as with many communist ideas, it is not so successful or cleanly running. There were a few aspects of communist universities that I found interesting, mainly because they are the exact opposite of what we in America hold to be important parts and characteristics of high learning institutions such as colleges and universities.
One of the first differences between our universities and the communist universities that struck me was their system and procedure for students who attend the universities. In America it seems as though almost every student has a chance to attend a university or an institution of higher learning beyond high school, in the communist countries, such opportunities are not so great. In the Communist countries it appears as though many students are sort of “pre-selected” to go on to college, and that such pre-selection depends on social status and a somewhat corrupt system. I was amazed to learn that the working classes got priority for universities over all other classes, but based on the Communist idea of the working class being the biggest and most powerful class, it seems to fit. It seems unfair that social class and status determines whether a student will continue on with a college education, but then again here in America a college education often falls upon the financial status of a student, which in turn often determines or is determined by the social status of the person. It’s somewhat backwards that the Communists did not go by intelligence and academic standing when selecting students and that system of social status determining college admissions shows they have a different view and understanding of education.
I was just surprised also at how corrupt the admissions system was in communist Poland, especially where people were falsifying documents and how some of the people in government were able to sneak their own children into college. It’s unfair that people in higher governmental positions abuse their powers, but at the same time, they wanted to provide their children with the special opportunity to study at a university. It is just another reflection of the corruption and inequality within the communist system. After reading about the type of education at the universities, I find it difficult to understand why people would want to study there though.
Another big difference I noticed as I read about education in communist Poland was the type of atmosphere and education found on the campus. It is nothing like the typical American campus, where the idea of learning and pushing the boundaries of education and thought seem to be prevalent. On the campuses of the Polish universities there was a strict adherence to the Communist principles where people where not to speak out against the government or political ideas and where education was limited. Textbooks were not around until years after the communist takeover and professors could only teach certain theories and ideas that did not conflict with communist principles and ideas. The students in turn were not much better. On American campuses, the student body often turned out to be the focal (or vocal) point of social and political action and change, the Communist campuses strived to provide the next set of leaders for the Communist party. This led to student spying on professors and other students and the limitation of free political and social speech on campuses. These campuses and universities meant a limited opportunity for students to learn.

College life 2009 compared to communist Poland

It is crazy to think how lucky we are in today's society. Most students plan on attending college after they graduate high school, whether it is a community college, technical school, 2 year college, or 4 year university. And even with the rising price of college tuition, many students still get the opportunity to go to college with the help of financial aid, college loans, scholarships, and most of all, parents. In communist Poland, you didn't get to choose if you wanted to attend college or not. You were chosen by the government, and this privilege was based on your social background, and your family's occupations and social status. What I find really interesting is that in today's society we see that many people who come from wealthy families have the most opportunities because of their family's wealth. Yet in Poland the students who were chosen to attend university did not come from a family of money, but usually from a family of workers like peasant farmers; and the less land you owned the better chance you had at being picked to attend university. The children of independent professionals, such as doctors and lawyers, had no chance of ever being chosen to go to college. Enrollment procedures at universities gave priority to the children of workers, regardless of the students' actual abilities or knowledge.

Another huge difference I noticed between mt student experiences now and the ones students endured in communist Poland was that students were unable to choose their program of study, which is basically what college is about today, doing something that you enjoy. The few students who were actually chosen to attend university didn't even have the option to choose what they wanted to study or learn about. The government selected the students they wanted to attend school and then put the students in fields where Poland was in need of workers. And most of the selected subjects were ones that helped the communists' strategy for "consolidating the power of the party." So basically the only reason students were allowed to attend university was so that the communist party could gain from it; the communists got new minds into their party by taking away the students' basic freedoms such as freedom of choice. And even with the limited number of subjects that students were forced to study, textbooks were still lacking and the only thing students were able to rely on were lecture notes. Today students can take classes online, use a tape recorder to tape lectures, watch lectures online and on television, and get the lecture on power point slides. We have countless options as to how we can take classes nowadays and the materials that professors use for each class. Back in communist Poland, teachers were limited solely to lectures and if they were lucky some students in the class had textbooks.

Students back then had to learn to deal with the regime's bureaucracy and how to survive in a system that was constantly changing and not for their benefit. We are so lucky that we live in a society where college has now become the norm, and we get to attend universities where we are supplied with textbooks and other materials to help us succeed in our classes. We even get involved in programs that help us find jobs and careers during school (internships) and after graduation; students in Poland weren't guaranteed jobs and most of the time they couldn't find a job anymore despite the fact that they were one of the few students lucky enough to get chosen to attend university. I think it is just insane how much education has changed in a little over 50 years.

the fight against economic colonization in Indonesia

In Indonesia today, a crisis is brewing between Indonesian President Suharto and the International Monetary Fund. with the world being shaken by a long, drawn out recession, nations not as strong or as resilient as the United States have been hit the hardest and are in dire situations. one such nation is Indonesia who has seen its currency drop by 30% and is facing more problems if help is not recieved. however as help is being offered by the IMF, many in Indonesia, such as the President himself, are hesitant and unwilling to follow IMF demands. in the New York Times article, "Crisis Aside, What Pains Indonesia Is the Humilation" Seth Mydans explains the complicated scenario of economic colonization. economic colonization is the buying up of a country by companies and the influence such companies weild in being able to make decisions in the countrys government. President Suharto explains his unwillingness to accept IMF help due to differing opinions on what should be done to help the Indonesian economy. while IMF is willing to fund plans to help, it also demands to be in control of how the money is spent and where/who it is given to. President Suharto has his own plans to help the economy that include setting an artificially strong rate of currency which could presently help the economy but could cause major problems in the future. another controversial issue is that President Suharto would be spending money to help his own family and relatives who own enterprises that have weakened during the recession.
in the end President Suharto is looking out for the best interests of Indonesia. the problem with economic colonization in a global economy is that the nation whos economy is being controlled by others is being used to help the colonizing nations. just as in the past with China, western powerful nations fed off the wealth of china. the economy created in China was to bring wealth to the west not to china itself. this is one of the major problems with economic colonization esp. in a global economy where larger, powerful, and wealthier nations have an advantage over smaller, weaker nations. because of this, often these smaller nations are taken advantage of and used to profit others. for this reason i think it is smart of President Suharto to protect Indonesia from economic colonization and create a better arrangement with IMF so that Indonesia will be controlled and run by Indonesians, not outsiders.

New York Times; "Crisis Aside, What Pains Indonesia Is the Humiliation" By Seth Mydans
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9903EFD81230F933A25750C0A96E958260&scp=1&sq=economic%20colonization&st=cse

Despite Crisis, Wealthy Russians Are Buying Up Coastal Montenegro

When I first think of the word colonization, I think of a group of people trying to establish or form a new colony so that they can settle and start a new life. So when I had to try to define and understand the word economic colonization, although I did not fully understand it at first after reading the article I found I believe that I have a better understanding of what it means. To help me try to understand what economic colonization meant searched for a reliable article and came across one in the New York Times titles, “Despite Crisis, Wealthy Russians Are Buying Up Coastal Montenegro”. The article talks about a town called BUDVA, which is located in Montenegro. The article talks about a bunch of rich Russian millionaires who are going around buying up land and properties around Montenegro. The men are investing millions of dollars into building hotels and condominiums. Although not all of the investments have been from Russia the article states that the majority of them did indeed come from there. Although some see Russia’s economic colonization as just a political move so that Russia can keep a close eye on them, many see the change as beneficial and that it will help their country
From this article the way that I understand economic colonization is that it is when a larger and more powerful country moves in to take over and to take on the responsibility for that smaller countries economy and making that small country dependent on that larger company. In a way this could be helpful and hurtful to the smaller country. It could help that small country grow and expand its economy by giving them a larger better-known name to work under. Also it may take away some of the problems with government and policies that they small country had before they were taken. But think could also lead to some negative affects as well, although they may get rid of their small problems they now are required to take on the much larger problems of the large country. And they now also have to live under the larger countries rules and government.
Economic colonization can help many small countries grow to be better, but they also take away that counties ability to survive on their own. It makes the countries that have been bought up by other larger countries more dependent on the large countries like Russia.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/01/world/europe/01balkans.html?scp=3&sq=economic%20colonization&st=cse

Travel: Countries that Love Americans

            Americans traveling outside of the US want to know whether they are traveling into a safe area or not.  Love for American countries hasn’t exactly been on the rise.  Areas such as the Middle East and Western Europe have very anti-american attitudes.  There have been a lot of other countries that have love for the USA and give travelers a sense of safeness.

             Albania is considered to have the most positive attitude toward Americans.  Albanians are known to appreciate how President Woodrow Wilson saved their country.  There was also a big trend where Albanians named their children after the US president.

            Tanzania is another country that is pro-America.  The reason that this sub-saharan African place is the most pro-american place in the world is because we have never tried to colonize it!  Here people really respect American values.

            Another country that appreciates America is India.  Indian people are used to working along side Americans and some aspire to come to the US.  England is another popular American country. 

We “..sprung from her loins after all, so tts no surprise that American travelers feel comfortable crossing the pond for a pilgrimage to Mother England.” It also helps that we speak the same language and share popular beliefs. 

            Poland is also very into our pop culture and accepts Americans coming into their country.  This website gives rise to the thinking that it has something to do with the country’s geographical coordinates.

            My cousin Frankie was going to go to the Peace corps and they will only let them live in areas where Americans are accepted.  Ghana was one of the places he could choose.  It is one of the more peaceful areas in Africa.  A lot of residents of Ghana have family over in the states. 

            While traveling it is an important factor to check out what the current attitude is like for American people.  While watching the video in class I couldn’t help but think that the people so intrigued with America were uneducated.  I think they have a god-like opinion of the US that is unrealistic. 

http://travel.aol.com/travel-ideas/international/galleries/countries-that-love-americans

Coming to America

I chose to write about the reasons why people want to come to America and what they see that is so appealing. I chose this because my Dad immigrated to America from Italy, with his family when he was in his late teens. When I asked him why his family decided to come to America he said, "It was the best country in the world and the richest country and everybody came to America. My family had nothing in Italy, we were extremely poor. America is the land for opportunity. Everybody wanted to experience it. " It seems really simple but he said it was as basic as that. Almost 50 years ago there was hardly any technology like what we have today so being able to really understand and see America was much harder than it was today. His family just knew it was better. They had nothing to loose in Italy so they made the trip to America.

I found two interesting articles to talk about but my first is about why people come to America. The article is called "People Immigrate for a Reason: American opportunity." The couple of sentences that sum up what is so great about American are, "America is not a race, a class, a skin color, a culture, or a religion. America is an idea. This idea states that its citizens, regardless of their origin, are free to chart their own destinies as individuals with equal rights and opportunities." I think this is the best couple of sentences because they describe exactly what America is about. We are a melting pot. We have endless opportunities. Immigrants come to America to form a new life. Families come to make a better life for themselves but individuals also come to leave behind poverty and strict lifestyles. I think one of the best parts about America is that there are opportunities to climb success ladders. One thing about America is that people always want more. To many people it may not be a favorable way of life but to others it means there are more places to go, things to do, and things to achieve. There are no specifications about what people need to be or look like in order to come into America.

In the description of what to blog about it says not to just state that people come to America because we are rich. An article that I found interesting as a response to that statement is about how people are actually coming to America because we are not doing so well financially. The article is from today and it is titled, "America for Sale: Foreigners Flock to U.S." It talks about how foreigners are coming to America for our real estate. The falling market and the weak dollar are appealing to foreigners. Speaking about how strong the Euro is right now the article states, "She just sold a 2,248-square-foot apartment for $11 million to an Italian man. Because of the difference between the Euro and dollar, he essentially bought the unit at a 30-percent discount."

Clearly there are many reasons why people choose to come to America. Other countries are prospering as we are financially hurting yet people still continue to come here. America is the place for opportunity. In the words of my Dad, "If we didn't come to America I would be picking olives and going to bed hungry and you would not be here today."

http://media.www.chicagoflame.com/media/storage/paper519/news/2006/03/27/Opinions/People.Immigrate.For.A.Reason.American.Opportunity-1722052.shtml

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/MarketTalk/Story?id=3694871&page=3

US/China Economic Colonization of Iraq/Tibet

Upon first reading the assignment and seeing the term economic colonization, I immediately thought, “well, what does that term even mean?” Colonization made me think of Pilgrims, the first settlers, and the 13 original colonies. Basically, colonization is when people from somewhere else come and settle down in new land and start living there similar to the way they lived in their previous location. Now, throw in the term economic, I immediately thought money, economy, globalization, and supply and demand. So tying the two terms together, economic colonization to me meant the foundations of an economic system of a different country. I found an article about China and Tibet and in the article describes China’s influence over Tibet and how Tibet is seen as a better life for Chinese, and some Chinese government campaigns have even encouraged the relocation. A new railroad has recently linked Tibet and China and sparked what seems to be a process of China influencing Tibet to act as China would and mimic a lot of their culture and government.

A lot of companies have been moving to Tibet and building offices to try and be a powerhouse in their newly forming economy. “As companies open their factories and offices in Tibet, opportunities are provided for local ethnic Tibetans to obtain jobs and higher levels of income than would previously been possible. Unfortunately, most Tibetans have received lower levels of education and training than their Chinese counterparts and, with a lack of local skilled workers Chinese are being brought in to Tibet to take the new jobs available.” With the influx of Chinese and foreigners, the Tibetan culture and how people live there is sure to change. New businesses will however bring new opportunity, however for whom? Who will reap the benefits? Surely not the Tibetan people if they are not able to work for these new companies because they are losing their jobs to the Chinese. In a sense, Tibetan is being colonized by other countries, mainly China, with so many Chinese run businesses, the economic system of China is sure to be imposed in Tibet, one business at a time and I’m sure eventually China and Tibet will be very similar. I do think it is wrong though. Tibet is not a big, powerful country like China is. China saw opportunity for economic expansion and growth in Tibet and took full advantage of that and is trying to impose a different culture and way of life in Tibet. http://china.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_chinese_domination_of_tibet

What China is doing to Tibet is similar to what the United States is doing in the Middle East today. I found an article dealing with this and in it states, “in direct conflict with its obligations under international law, the Bush Administration is fundamentally altering Iraq's economic laws to U.S. corporate advantage and is not adequately restoring and providing Iraqis with fundamental necessities such as water and electricity.” The US is imposing economic laws that will reap benefits in our advantage. The article said that U.S. corporations are already reaping staggering revenues from their Iraqi operations, however due to certain restriction the US is not allowed to reinvest that money back into Iraq. We are economically colonizing Iraq to have a similar economy to the US. The entire way of life for the people of Iraq is going to change because there way of life is not going to coincide with the type of economic market that the US is trying to set up over there, which just doesn’t seem fair to me. http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=5443

Although the last article dealt mainly with the Bush Administration and is a few years old, it will be interesting to see in the years to come what the major effects will be. I also look forward to seeing what Obama and plans to do about the situation in Iraq. The effects of Economic Colonization depend on which side you look at. In Tibet and Iraq’s case, the effects are not going to be great- other countries are coming in and reaping benefits at their expenses. Granted, Tibet and Iraq’s cases are a little different, in general that is what going on. The US/Iraq article said that hundreds of US companies are already operating out of Iraq, which is beneficial to them, but not really to Iraq.

A Negative Effect of American Lifestyle

After watching the movie in class, I better understood the extent to which American culture influences other countries. While the movie illustrated the prominence of second hand clothing in Zambia, Pietra Rivoli writes about Tanzania. Rivoli states, “The most stunning scenery in Tanzania is not the savannah landscape but the African women…Many of the African women in Dar Es Salaam are draped in brilliantly colored native cloth…The men are muted background to this scenery. Almost all of the men and boys in Dar Es Salaam were mitumba – clothing thrown away by Americans” (189-190). Second hand clothing has authority in various countries where poverty is prevalent. I found it difficult to uncover articles that further explained countries such as Tanzania and Zambia’s interest in American lifestyle.

What I did find is an article about China and the effects American lifestyle has had on the people. China has been a popular topic of interest in the past decade because of its growing global influence. China has become more industrialized and more of a competitor in the free market. When China connected with Western countries they adopted the Western way of life as well. Not all aspects of Western lifestyle have positive effects. A new study was released that provides evidence on the impact diet and exercise are having on cancer. People in China are adopting America’s bad habits claims the article titled, “American Health Habits Influence China.” The article states, “Many Chinese urban areas have adopted a Western lifestyle and diet, which has led to a massive increase in the number of people diagnosed with cancer.” For example, breast cancer rates have increased by thirty-seven percent in just ten years. China is now fearful that unhealthy lifestyle changes occurring in urban cities will spread to the radically changing rural areas. Zhang Jin, the chief breast cancer surgeon at Tinajin Cancer Institute and Hospital states, "When China connected with Western countries, we imported their lifestyles too.” Connected is an important word in understanding why other countries find America so appealing. America has been a powerhouse nation for many decades now possessing basic freedoms and independent individuals with access to many technologies. America has an image and as globalization grew China connected with America and captured the image of America through products. Second hand clothing and fatty snacks are other countries pieces of American culture. The more pieces of American culture these countries come in contact with the more appealing America appears to become.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/26/eveningnews/main4832554.shtml

Economic Colonization: Good Thing or Bad?

Having never heard the term ‘economic colonization’ I tried to break it down and figure out what this meant in today’s world. ‘Economics’ is pretty much a countries money system and how businesses within that particular country work together to bring wealth to the country and the citizens of that country. The idea of ‘supply and demand’ comes to mind when I hear ‘economics.’ Colonization to me is a very outdated practice. When I think of colonization I think of the European nations sailing around the world during the Age of Exploration and claiming every bit of land in Africa and Asia, and of course the British coming to the ‘New World’ and colonizing what would become the United States of America. After reading only a few lines of the article entitled, “The Economic Colonization of Iraq: Illegal and Immoral” I realized that it was pretty much a no-brainer to what this term actually means.

In the article it discusses how the United States, under former President George W. Bush (article if from 2004), invaded Iraq for military purposes, but is now attempting to make economic strides for themselves while they’re in Iraq. The author of the article, Antonia Juhasz, says in her article that under international law, this is illegal for the U.S. to do, as well as being immoral. I can see why Juhasz thinks what is happening is immoral, because usually when the United States or any other economically powerful nation outsources things to be made or produced, which is what is happening in Iraq, the ways in which laborers involved are treated are questionable. One of the main reasons for these powerful countries to outsource is because in other countries it is cheaper to pay people in the particular country. The pay is lower and the working conditions in many cases are almost inhumane: people working for over twelve hours a day for six or seven days a week, not well-lit or well ventilated warehouses, performing the same monotonous job countless times over and over again, etc.

One of the issues that the article discusses is the fact that our ‘purpose’ for going into Iraq was to help the Iraqi people rebuild and reconstruct their government, as well as helping them jumpstart their economy. However, the U.S. is rebuilding Iraq in a way that is attempting to make the Iraqi way of life more American. I think it was Gabby who made the point in class last week that more powerful countries try to make ‘struggling’ nations more like their own country, when the resources and means of accomplishing that are not available. It is true that the U.S. is one of the most economically successful nations in the world (minus our whole economic situation at present). The U.S. has good relations with many countries it trades with, as well as having products being produced within its borders and having a labor-force available. Not all of these things are available in Iraq and to their citizens and not only that but the resources to have these things in Iraq are simply not there.

Economic colonization affects the global economy by having products made for very cheap labor prices. As stated before, the reason for going to other poorer nations to ‘set up shop’ and have the poorer country’s citizens work is because it is cheaper labor than getting the same job done in the wealthier nation. This brings down the prices for a lot of goods and services and because of the economic idea that when price goes down the demand for goods goes up; this will have a very positive effect on the economy of the world.


“The Economic Colonization of Iraq: Illegal and Immoral,” Antonia Juhasz.
http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=232.

economic colonization

I have always believed that there was only one type of colonization in our world, and that meant a large, powerful country taking over either an area of uncharted land or a smaller country. It’s something that barely exists in today’s world and is something out of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. What I have come to understand though is that there are different ways for colonization in today’s world. You can have political colonization where a country’s government is completely influenced by another country. You can also have economic colonization which is also gradual and is often tied with political colonization, as once you have one you basically have the other.
Economic colonization is the idea of one bigger and more powerful country basically taking over and accounting for a large portion of another country’s economy. The larger country will invest heavily through business and eventually gain control of the economy, thus making the smaller country dependent upon their investments. It is an idea that is very feasible in today’s world and it can be seen throughout the world. Some argue that American involvement in Iraq is a form or economic colonization. I would have to say that the two countries that tend to catch the most accusations of this practice are America and Russia.
I recently read an article in the New York Times about how there is a fear that Russia may be practicing economic colonization in the Balkans. The article focused on the small country of Montenegro, which over the past two decades has seen a large growth in foreign investments, especially from Russia. Russian millionaires have been investing a lot of their money in Montenegro and it has become a favorite visiting place of the Russian rich. The problem with the situation in Montenegro is that it is hard to tell just how much Russia is investing in the country and the statistics are off depending on who you get them from. Many fear that Russia is looking to economically colonize the tiny country and this would allow them to keep close political ties with that country and those in the Balkan region. Many also see this as a move against NATO and the European Union because many of the pro-Western governments in the Balkan region are seeking to join the organizations. Russia generally views both organizations as a threat to their political and economic well-being. In the article though, some Montenegrins feel that the Russian investment is good and is only helping their country.
Economic colonization is interesting because while it can lead to political colonization and problems, it also helps smaller countries grow. At the same time, though, these small countries become dependent of the larger countries and their economies, which in this economic day and age is quite dangerous. This article is about three months old, so it will be interesting to see if anything has changed in the country due to the economic climate of the world today and over the past few months. This economic colonization has a large affect on the global economy because it connects countries economically and makes them dependent of each other, which means if one hits hard times, they all do. This also further divides the world between Russia and the West, which is often not economically cooperative and a very delicate relationship.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/01/world/europe/01balkans.html?pagewanted=1&sq=economic%20colonization&st=cse&scp=3

the Apple iPhone: An American Ambassador

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/wireStory?id=5346449

Japan is home to the largest gadget produces in the world, such as Sony and Panasonic, but last summer Japan was enthralled with an American product, the iPhone. This gadget was created in Cupertino California and has become one of the largest trends in America through the past two years. Prior to its launch “a line of nearly 800 iPhone fans snaked around the block, with some sleeping on the streets to ensure they would be among the first customers.” (Kageyama) The iPhone may not be bringing new features to the advanced Japanese cell phone market, but these consumers cannot wait to get their hands on it. This is just one example of foreign countries admiration with America’s culture. The iPhone has become the fad in America that Japan has to have it. I believe this all stems from the American myth. Most foreigners have never been to America and only hear about our culture and trends through secondary sources. These individuals build America up and put it on a pedestal. America is where the world’s largest professional sports are played and home to Hollywood. America is blanketed with a shawl of “coolness,” if you will. The Japanese had heard about the Apple iPhone being the hottest gadget in America and they had to have it, even though it is less innovative then their current technology according to Kageyama, “The iPhone's capabilities are less revolutionary here, where people have for years used the tech-heavy local phones for restaurant searches, e-mail, music downloads, reading digital novels and electronic shopping. They tend to shrug off foreign models, such as those of Nokia Corp.” (Kageyama)

America almost walks around with a chip on its shoulder and I believe other countries buy into this. We boast most of the world’s riches and are labeled the destination for freedom. This image we have created transcends through all cultures. I think our military presence and power creates an image of superiority over other countries and forces them to look up to us. Military power forces others to recognize you and acknowledge your strengths. For years America was lenient on immigration and foreigners flocked to America with hopes and dreams. We boast economic and personal freedom. Many other countries do not experience this and thus look up to anything and everything America does. These poor countries look at America as a utopia because of its safety and economic prowess. Our successes have translated into hope for other countries. Thee people believe that if they work hard they can come to America and succeed. This sense of hope is often applied to all things American. People in foreign countries will watch our movies or listen to our music just because it’s American and in a way makes them feel freer. The iPhone didn’t bring new technology or features to Japan, but it did bring an American lifestyle and the Japanese public couldn’t wait to get their hands on it. The Japanese who purchased an iPhone felt a sense of superiority because of their new gadget with exclusive ties to the American culture.

A love for America

After watching the movie, I understood more about how America truly affects every country there is, especially the underdeveloped ones. I found it interesting how what some Americans even consider garbage, used t-shirts are a source of income and a way of life for people thousands of miles away. The comparison between the US and countries that are this underdeveloped is wild to think what kind of waste the US could be committing.
I found it difficult to find such specific websites on economic colonization so I found a few websites that I found interesting and pertaining to certain things we have been talking about in class.

In the first article I came across, I thought it would be interesting to mention how the United States plans to give $900 million dollars in aid to the Palestinian people of Gaza. Hillary Clinton, U.S. Secretary of State made this offer public in Sharm el-Sheikh on Monday, March 02, 2009. The U.S. is concerned the money doesn’t fall into the hands of Hamas, a U.S. declared terrorist group. The money is being offered to foster a better Palestinian state, which will in turn eventually be helping the world and the United States. I think that by offering this money, it is definitely making Palestinian people and their leaders have a favorable position towards the United States as we are showing a helping hand even in our own time of crisis. There will always be people that dislike the United States due to the power it has and being wary of its intentions, yet I feel that most people in Palestine will be grateful that the U.S. wants to help the people of Gaza become more financially stable and have a better quality of life.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/02/mideast.clinton/index.html
This next little article I found I just thought was an interesting blurb to look at in regards to favorable opinions of the United States.
http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2008/09/11/5-countries-with-the-most-favorable-opinions-of-the-us.html
It seems that South Koreans have the most favorable view of Americans. I believe this to be due to the business that we give to South Koreans among other things like American ideas and products that are brought into their country and surrounding Asia.
I then came across an article about an ex Taliban ambassador to Pakistan. For years of life he was not allowed to play games, know popular culture or experience technology. After spending 4 years in Guantanamo Bay, he became a part of popular society and came into the 21st century by purchasing an Apple Iphone. This device he now never without because he absolutely loves it. The article goes on to say how young Afghanistan people love to be a part of the rest of the world, especially American TV as they have their own version, Afghan Star.
It seems that the citizens of Afghanistan like the ways of Americans when it comes to technology and some cultural ideas. They like the idea of being connected and having choice and freedoms. Unfortunately, the government in Afghanistan is not as welcoming to change and is restricting their citizens. Hopefully, this will change and Afghanistan people will be able to express themselves like Americans eventually.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-woiphone0304,0,6500853.story

The Appeal of American Lifestyle

In researching why American life style and economy are so appealing to people in Zambia, I found that an explanation was hard to come by. I did find some articles that were seemingly unrelated, however, I believe they have helped me come to a conclusion. The first article is about foreign exchange students in America (http://www.usa.afs.org/usa_en/news/afs_in_media/4537). These exchange students came to America, skeptical of the American culture. These students were from Germany. After their stay in the United States, they found it hard to part. They had previously been submersed, in their native country, in prejudices of the U.S. They had preconceived notions that “Americans are dumb, ignorant of the rest of the world and satisfied with lounging on a sofa, beer in hand, and watching a football game on TV”. However, after spending time here, their ideas changed. This article made me think. If in countries such as Germany, preconceived notions of our country are passed on through generation, what’s to say that the same does not go for Zambia. In Zambia, the used-clothing trade is a dominant industry. This exposure to American products, no matter how used, and the passing on of preconceived notions of the U.S. both shape the attitudes of these people. However, this explanation is too simple.

In another article about influences of American culture, culture and globalization are combined in explaining American influence (http://www.america.gov/st/econ-english/2008/June/20080608094132xjyrreP0.2717859.html) . The author talks about the spread of modernity as a major contributor to strong American culture influences. With the spread of modernity comes the loss of local cultures. In the case of Zambia and other localities, the used clothing market has dominated life. Facilitated by the race to the bottom, Americans have been buying and discarding more and more clothing. Hence, more and more used clothing has been shipped and marketed in Zambia over the past couple decades. The younger generations in Zambia have been submersed in this used-clothing market since birth. And since these articles of clothing come from America, the people relate themselves to the U.S. They are wearing clothing previously owned by a United States citizen and clothing is a type of individual expression. So therefore, these people relate their individual selves with the U.S. This is also accompanied by a lack of education of U.S. intervention in Zambian issues. This is why I believe there is such a Zambian appeal to American lifestyle and economy.

Why do they love America so much?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/world/asia/17harbin.html?_r=1&scp=5&sq=Disney%20&%20globalization&st=cse

I found this article in the NY Times that talks about globalization in China. One of China's most popular wintertime tourist attractions is the Harbin Ice Lantern Festival, but this past year the festival did not include iconic Chinese monuments like the Great Wall and the Forbidden City, but Disney characters such as Mickey Mouse and Winnie the Pooh. The common response to this situation would be for local Chinese people to be upset with the change, but in reality people enjoyed the Disney characters and locals understood the reasons for doing this. Some had said it was for the young children, while others had mentioned that it brought back their childhood memories of watching Disney movies.

It seems that people are so accustomed to American things in their countries that it isn't a big deal to them when American theme parks and icons take the place of their traditional festivals and cultural events. I would think that most people would find this change appalling and a back stab to the Chinese culture, but yet none of the Chinese people saw things this way. People were almost glad that Disney characters were featured at the festival; they love the American way of living and Disney is an American theme park.

I think that what makes America so appealing to other countries is our society. We live the most powerful country in the world, our citizens have human rights and basic freedoms and live independent lives. For so many people America is the land of opportunities and I think that is the main reason we attract so many people from other countries. Americans are individualists with strong work ethics who live in a society free from persecution, discrimination, and terrorism (on our own land). I think that America represents the world's possible future; people from other countries always hear about things going on in the United States and how powerful our military forces and government are, so I think when countries become more globalized, or "Americanized," that people see this as a good sign. When their home country becomes more like the United States people look to that a sign that their country could possibly be as great as the United States and these people could live similar lifestyles. Although we know this isn't completely true, I think this is the reason that people love American products and our way of living. Therefore, Chinese people did not get upset at the fact that Disney world took over one of their most popular, traditional festivals.