Nigger Response

Well, in one word this book was severly disappointing. I think that I completely misunderstood the concept of the book right from the start and because I had certain expectations I felt let down by it. I thought that this book was going to be a more of a feeling type of book where the emotions are the main focus and how it affected specific people. I thought it was going to be his life story dealing with racial prejudices but it turned out to be more focused on certain court cases and the facts behind the word. Yes, while I feel completely uncomfortable saying or even typing the word up above, I am much less interested in where the word came from and how it came about through people using it and more interested in the effect it has had on people's lives as well as what people had to go through with such racial prejudices in their lives. I wanted a much more personal book, rather than analytical. In the episode of Boston Public we watched I felt that the students were much more touched and moved by the book than I was. It may have been that there were more black students in the class, but I felt that it would have been a much more powerful book and easier for everyone to connect to regardless of skin color if it had been more personal. The fact is, it is hard to connect with those involved in court cases but by feeling involved in the struggles of a person you connect with them. By doing so the author could have had a much larger and deeper reaching effect on those who read it.

Let's Talk About Race

While this article was well thought out and powerful, I felt that the picture on the first page was more powerful than anything that was said within the actual text. We can debate until we're blue in the face about what is politically correct to say and who can say it, but when we actually see the effects of what our ancestors actually did or had done to them, we really realize what the effects of racism are. Unfortunately, there are still people out their who feel comfortable using racist terms in their everyday life. Under no circumstances is it acceptable to use these words. It doesn't matter if you have been provoked, or are just on a tirade for thirty seconds. Those thirty seconds can change the world's perception of you such as it did for Michael Richard. We are all told that we have a right to free speech, but when does this free speech cross the line into libel and slander? Why would anyone using free speech need to use these hurtful words? Sadly, there are many who cannot come up with anything other than racial slurs and because of it there is no true basis to any of their belief systems whatsoever.

Republic Summary

The main focus of Book 2 is that Glaucon is trying to reinforce what Socrates has been telling the people. He splits up justice into three different groupings. The first group is justice in the things we desire only for their consequences. The second is things we desire for our own happiness and well being. And the third is things we desire for our own happiness as well as what we get from them. Glaucon wants Socrates to prove that the only justice we are willing to follow is one from the third group. Glaucon is saying that the only reason we follow along with justice is for our own personal gain, there is nothing selfless about it. The main focus of Book 3 is the training, mental and physical of the guardians or warriors. Socrates believes that there needs to be a balance between the physical training as well as the training of the soul and mind. He feels that these heroes need to have a blend of music and art along with their military training. Without one or the other these heroes will either become too harsh and vicious or become too soft and unable to do their jobs. Without and equal balance, these heroes will never be considered true heroes and guardians.

Plato's Crito

This part of the story is a conversation between Socrates and Crito. Crito visits Socrates and tells him that he is there to break him out of prison. Socrates feels that it would be wrong for him to break out of prison because by doing so he is breaking the laws that he is upholding but at the same time trying to repair. He realizes that these laws, while not perfect, are still not there to be broken. If he was to break out he would have to leave town, therefore leaving his family behind, his children without a father. On top of all that, Socrates fears that if he were to break out, he would face hell after death and that that is another reason to stay true to his morals and stay in prison throughout the trial.

Bowling for Columbine

So, apparently this Michael Moore guy is a big liberal. The fact of the matter is that Moore went places and did things that everyone else was afraid to do. Not only did he give people a voice that had none, but he went up against superpowers such as Wal-Mart and the NRA, also. Contrary to what HardyLaw states, I believe that Bowling for Columbine is in fact a documentary. Not only did it inform its viewers, but Michael Moore was also entertaining in the way he presented himself and what he did. And yes, this film was extremely biased and may have had information that was bent and skewed, its backbone of information was solid and therefore should be considered a non-fiction film. The fact that the NRA still had its rally so close to the time of the Columbine shootings, I feel would be completely devastating for the population of this small town. It's all nice that the NRA cancelled many of its events, but Charlon Heston still was there supporting the use of guns. How could anyone be so heartless to hold a pro-gun rally so close to the time two teenagers went into their school and shot their fellow classmates as well as teachers? So Moore may have held back a few details and stretched a few truths, however the fact that he was able to look past the norm and delve deeper into the lives and the experiences of those involved more than makes up for this.