This assignment is for Honors Civics Period 6.
The weekly assignment consists of five parts:
1) Read the assignments. This week's readings are We The People, Chapter 37 and an article that served as the basis for Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam.
2) Take Cornell Notes on the readings. I will collect these notes on Friday in class.
3) Find another credible source on the internet that connects to the reading above or to the class topic from this week ("Is America living up to our ideals?"). You can use any of the sites I have listed on the right, or more general news sites like nytimes.com.
4) After you read the source that you find, answer the following questions as a blog entry below:
- Write a summary sentence for the text you found.
- How does the text connect to that week’s topic or to the other text you have read?
- What evidence do you have that the text you found is credible?
- Does the author present strong evidence to support his/her argument? Provide an example.
- Create a short synthesis paragraph on the one of the texts and your text.
Keep in mind that everyone else will see what you write below, so please keep it professional. This post is due Thursday, 10/11, by 5:00pm.
5) Come to class on Friday ready to discuss the reading and the text you found!
If you need support or have questions, my office hours are Wednesday and Thursday from 3:15-4:15 in Room 229.
Civic engagement has lost its meaning. When civic engagement was practiced, people found that their trust with others was high. Issues were resolved as a community within one another. Now, individuals are no longer taking their time to come together in order to solve problems. This trend is also occurring nation-wide. When it comes to voting, civic engagement is at its most thin. Without the trust of government, the number of voters will decrease. However, if we repair this problem, the trust individuals had for their government will be renewed.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 37 of We the People, readers are informed in the ways that civic discourse can help challenges facing Americans. Indeed, presidential elections are a time of stress. Seen in today’s presidential election, a debate recently took place between Romney and Obama. Throughout the debate, Obama and Romney defended their argument which allowed for their perspectives to be heard. It is then when individuals are able to hear the opposing side of their own argument. We the People argues that people don’t take time to hear the other perspective of an argument. Once their minds are made up, they set to stone. They say that personal attacks are now common in politics. This is because people don’t know how to be civil with each other. They believe that throwing personal attacks will get their point across, but it won’t. It also isn’t a very effective way to persuade others to join your argument. If you follow civic discourse, there is no room for “harsh feelings.” Everyone must have a chance to speak and if your opponent is speaking, you must give them your attention. Doing otherwise would be uncivilized. These small factors are what cause individuals to not trust anyone, including government. They often rely on government to fix their own issues. As the loss of trust continues to grow, there have been changes in political participation. During elections, there has been a decline it the turn-outs. State and local elections have decreased drastically because of this problem. In order to fix it, the OECD Better Life Index suggests that we return the people’s trust back to government.
The OECD Better Life Index is an internet source where one is able to see how civic engagement affects the voting turn-outs. With this internet source, you can look at issues that affect different countries. Throughout the article, voting statistics are included. These statistics are taken from observations made during elections. They describe the differences of the number of votes in different countries. Some of them include the comparison between the amounts of female voters vs. male voters. The website is well known for displaying different topics to help promote policies that will improve economic and social well-being for all. In its civic engagement topic, the source states, “transparency in communication and open access to regulations promotes government accountability… and public trust in government institutions.” If the people have access to the regulations that government place on the people, then people would feel more inclined to trust government. This in turn affects the amount of voters that vote. The trust they will have with the government will make them feel confident enough to want to vote for a candidate; while still knowing that is what they want.
The source would also agree with We the People that “voter participation is the best existing means of measuring civic and political engagement.” In voting, people are demonstrating their trust towards government. Voting is a crucial step in the lives of every individual. Their vote (or even if they don’t vote) affects the outcome of presidential elections. If you vote, you are putting your say for one candidate. If you don’t vote, then your power is in the hands of all other voters. One shouldn’t give up their power just because civic engagement has lost its meaning. If civic engagement is restored, then America can get closer to its democracy; that of which is a basic foundation of America.
The text that I found this week is, "Unions Are Good for the American Economy" by David Madland and Karla Walter. The text deals with labor unions and explains how labor unions have the potential to improve the American Economy. In unions workers unite to collectively bargain for more benefits. In return of these benefits workers are motivated to work more at the work place which increases productivity, thus improving the American Economy. Those that join unions also help non-union aligned workers because businesses pay these workers around the same amount as union aligned workers so that their workers do not join a union. So whether one joins a union or not, the act of having many unions promotes benefits for the entire work force.
ReplyDeleteThis text connects to civil engagement, the main topic of this week's readings, because it is civil engagement in action. The purpose of civic engagement is to increase the quality of public life through the arguments that different parties have with one another. This argumentation makes members of both parties better informed on the issue and allows each respective party to modify its stance on a view so that both parties gradually reach a consensus. Both parties obtain some, if not all of what they want, and their ability to cooperate strengthens which in turn encourages the co-creation of new ideas that will benefit the general public. This process forms a parallel with the labor union article I explained above because labor unions are a form of civic engagement."Unions Are Good for the American Economy" is a credible source because its authors are experts on the subject of employment. One of the authors, David Madland, is the Director of the American Worker Project at American Progress. He has written articles for the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and has appeared often on CNN, and Fox News. All of these organizations are prestigious and known for the reliable information they provide the public with. Their popularity is based on their reputations and the fact that the author of this article is trusted enough to work with or for all of these organizations speaks volumes of this article's credibility. The authors present strong evidence to support their argument that unions help improve the economy in the form of statistics. According to "Unions Are Good for the American Economy", "If American workers were rewarded for 100 percent of their increases in labor productivity between 1980 and 2008—as they were during the middle part of the 20th century—average wages would be $28.53 per hour—42.7 percent higher than the average real wage in 2008" (Madland and Walter 1). The difference between these different time periods is that half a century ago there were more labor unions and now that there are less they aren't as capable of fighting for just compensation as they were before. Since the civic engagement decreased, so did the power of the individuals and along with that power went their wages. When more individuals are earning higher wages they are paying more taxes and spending more which means they are contributing more to the economy.
In Bowling Alone" America's Declining Social Capital Putnam discusses how our lack of civic engagement is resulting in a greater dependency on government, which gives government the power to decide what is best for us. Putnam would agree with Madland and Walter's article because it stresses how civic engagement, in the form of unions, encourages individuals to take initiative over their own lives and argue for better conditions. The purpose of civic engagement is to increase the quality of public life, and when labor unions argue with business owners the general public benefits because both parties obtain what they want, and the American economy benefits from the resolution of their differences. So Putnam would determine that Madland and Walter epitomize his views on civic engagement.
http://www.people-press.org/2011/05/13/most-say-homosexuality-should-be-accepted-by-society/
ReplyDeleteAccording to a survey from May 2011 on the Pew Research Center for People & Press’ site, there has been a decline in American opposition towards homosexuality. The Pew Research Center for People & Press is known as an independent, non-partisan organization that provides information on public opinions and topics that are occurring in the United States. Because of this reputation, the organization provides accurate and resourceful information that is extremely helpful for individuals who are hoping to learn more about the issues surrounding America.
The data that is provided on the site shows that there has been a major change in the United States compared to the statistics surrounding acceptance of homosexuality from previous years. This topic relates to chapter 37 of We The People entitled, “What Key Challenges Does The U.S. Face in the Future?” because of the predictions that the U.S. Census Bureau made about how the United States would look by the year 2050. One of these predictions included how “racial lines will blur as people intermarry”. Of course, this topic is very different from the topic of homosexuality, but at the same time, there is a connection. Since more races have been fusing together over the years, the imaginary line that had been formed between races has slowly been fading away, and is reducing racial ignorance and tension throughout the nation. Within the Pew Research Center’s article, the imaginary line is not between races, but rather between society and homosexuals. It is obvious that for numerous years, there has been tension surrounding this topic amongst those who are accepting of homosexuality and those who discourage it. However, the article states that about 58% of Americans say homosexuality should be accepted into society, while 33% opposed the idea. The fact that more than half of the population believes that an idea that was once considered to be bad should now be accepted shows a clear representation of the change we are seeing in America.
Instead of choosing to continue on with the same mindset for several years, Americans are becoming more self-aware towards what they believe is right and what is wrong. Americans are essentially trying to follow the ideas of the founding principles in order to not only make the nation better, but to also have social and political equality throughout American culture. Throughout the Pew Research Center’s article, it is clear that most Americans have been able to conform and work towards the key challenge included within the We The People article which states that “America’s social and political institutions will have to adapt continually to a society very different from the one that existed...” (278). Until the general public finds a way to establish a clear compromise on issues such as their stand on homosexuality, this challenge still stands as a major obstacle within the country.
If the Pew Research Center’s staff members were to read the We The People article, I would assume that they would agree with the fact that in order for America to be successful, they would have to face up to the first key challenge provided within the article. If Americans didn’t do this, it would be difficult for the nation to progress in the years to come. If the author of We The People were to read the Pew Research Center’s article, I would assume that the author would be satisfied to see how America is adapting to social and political change in order to strengthen the country. By doing so, the author would conclude that Americans are truly establishing a stable foundation for themselves.
The text I found this week was “The Failing U.S. Government-The Crisis of Public Management” by Jeffrey D. Sachs. This article was about how public health, infrastructure, energy, and national security need to change for the advantage of individuals which relates to this week’s topic about if America is living up to its ideals.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, Jeffrey D. Sachs suggests that America is not living up to its ideals because Americans are divided based on policies of government, business, and the civil society. This means that Americans in the working class and Americans in the business class are still debating which political party whether Republican or Democrat will protect their needs and define how stable society will be. In addition, the text that I found also connects to Chapter 37 from We the People because in this chapter there is a part that discusses the American expectations on government. According to this reading Americans expect for the United States government to be responsible for protecting them but the truth is that the American government is already doing enough; some independence is needed in this nation. Evidently, both Sachs article and We the People connect to this week’s topic because American’s are looking forward to a better future. With this hope Americans emphasize that the nation remains strong because of the expectations and changes that result from them.
In “The Failing U.S. Government-The Crisis of Public Management” Jeffrey D. Sachs uses several examples to inform the public about how they can advise the government to protect them and their resources. For example, Sachs writes that only thirty-eight percent of Americans in New Orleans is still suffering from Hurricane Katrina. Evidently, sixty-two percent of Americans still need help including housing, mental stability, and valuing traditions. We need citizens to become involved. Sachs indicates that organizations which are funded by the government need to perform activities and create new ideas to help individuals go back to stability. In addition, Sachs also writes that Americans can get their needs met through promoting nutrition, food systems, and a safer environment. Here, organizations will realize people’s efforts to promote equality in health and ensure that they get some type of coverage. Therefore, this text is credible because Jeffrey D. Sachs is Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, an American economist, and published this article in 2009 in the Scientific American magazine, a well-known magazine that Americans read since 1993 until now to see how the country is changing and the actions yet to be taken.
Jeffrey D. Sachs would agree with the writer of We the People that individual involvement is needed to create change in a situation. In acting to raise awareness about a subject, humans draw attention to themselves to prove that they need actual help but cannot do as much because they are not completely suited in terms of political stance and financial situations. Overall, Americans that work together embrace true democracy and are at advantage of seeing American ideals fulfilled.
The document I found was titled “Social Capital and the News Media” by Pippa Norris. This document was mostly about how perhaps the decline of social capital is not related to social media and technology, but the opposite. This text connects to Robert Putnam’s “Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital” because not only does Norris directly quote Putnam’s text, but directly responds and counters an issue addressed by Putnam, the decline of social capital and interaction because of the widespread of technology. This text is credible because it was published by Harvard Kennedy School of Government, a school within Harvard University, an extremely prestigious Ivy League in America who would unlikely post false information in order to prevent tarnishing its reputations. Additionally, this is a credible source because it was written by a Paul F. McGuire Lecturer in Comparative Politics, who is a political scientist focusing on democracy and development, public opinion and elections, political communications, and gender politics and has won the 2011 Johan Skytte prize, which not only shows this writer has extensive knowledge of the subject, but has been well-recognized nationally.
ReplyDeleteIn the document, Norris presents a graph, a table and an analysis of the statistical data presented in the World Values Study in the mid-1990s, published by the World Bank (1997). Both displays of data show correlation between use of the media, such as television and newspapers, and social capital. Norris analyzes the data and states; “First, societies characterized by high social capital by this measure are also ones that have widespread access to all the mass media, with strong and significant correlations across all indicators. The relationship is strongest for social capital and use of newspapers, but there is also a positive relationship between social capital and access to television, not a negative one.” For example, in the chart presented by Norris, the correlation between per capita newspaper circulation and social trust was .744, which clearly shows positive increase. Evidently, Norris is indicating through her study of previously collected data from the World Bank. The World Bank, an international financial institution that provides loans to developing countries developed by the United States, collected data from 47 nations in the mid-1990s, which demonstrates that perhaps, television has had a positive effect on communities worldwide. By having a wider range of data that supports her argument, Norris is able to prove her thesis is correct.
As Putnam would argue that the development of innovations has severed the civic engagement of today’s generation, Norris would dispute that technology has actually resulted in an increase of social capital among global communities. Putnam writes, “Television has made our communities (or, rather, what we experience as our communities) wider and shallower….” Putnam suggests that inventions such as the television have resulted in the isolation of individuals and has affected their leisure time. This has not only decreased the amount of social interaction amongst individuals, but has also decreased social capital, such as participating in community based groups, politics or even religious meetings. Norris counters such an assumption when she states, “the claims that it is the pervasive spread of television and privatized leisure in postindustrial societies that is driving any long-term erosion in social capital in general, and social trust in particular, does not seem to be supported by this cross-national evidence.” Clearly, Norris is using statistics from an international perspective not only defend today’s generation’s stance on social issues, but also to suggest that there may be a positive aspect to technology and the role it has played to change today’s meaning of social capital and trust. Norris makes it clear that technology has strengthened American’s trust, a quality Putnam has implied decreased during past generations.
In “Vivek Wadhwa: Stop the U.S. Highly-Skilled ‘Immigrant Exodus’ Now”, Sam Gustin presents Wadhwa’s strong economic perspective for allowing highly-skilled immigrants to stay in the U.S. In chapter 37 of We The People presents important challenges that America will encounter in the future. One such challenge was immigration. The article by Gustin also portrays immigration as an important prospect for the future. Both texts can agree on the seriousness of immigration and its impact on the future of the U.S.
ReplyDelete“Vivek Wadhwa: Stop the U.S. Highly-Skilled ‘Immigrant Exodus’ Now” is a reliable source because it comes from a major news source. Times Magazine has an illustrious enterprise and a strong reputation. Offering misinformation would destroy its reputation, the corporation cannot take such a gamble. Furthermore, this article focuses on immigration which is a major issue in this presidential election. Giving flawed information could jeopardize the election and even decide it. It needs to be cautious of the information it presents.
Gustin uses statistical exemplification to prove his argument. A statistic asserts, “…that the proportion of immigrant-founded companies nationwide has slipped from 25.3% to 24.3% since 2005, and in Silicon Valley, the percentage of immigrant-founded startups declined from 52.4% to 43.9% during that time”. This shows that the immigrant exodus has affected businesses. In addition, based on a study, “…immigrant founders are most likely to start companies in the “innovation/manufacturing-related services (45%) and software (22%) industries,” and employed some 560,000 workers nationwide. These companies generated an estimated $63 billion in sales from 2006 to 2012”. This indicates that the immigrant exodus is having the adverse affects on business and the economy. Retaining highly-skilled immigrants will be better for the economy.
Immigration has been an important issue in the past and is in an important present issue, this indicates that it will be an important issue in the future as well. In chapter 37 of We The People immigration has a negative effect because it will cause population to rise. Although this can strain our resources it can also help create more opportunities and help the American economy. This economic position is present in “Vivek Wadhwa: Stop the U.S. Highly-Skilled ‘Immigrant Exodus’ Now” which helps to defend highly-skilled immigrants. By keeping entrepreneurs, doctors, engineers, and other highly-skilled immigrants the U.S. can benefit. Both authors can agree that to maximize the benefit of immigration it needs to be regulated, a balance needs to found because a large population will make it difficult for a nation to prosper. Both sides of the legislature need to come to an agreement on immigration. While immigration has positive and negative affects a decision needs to be made that will benefit the nation the most. If the immigration issue is not resolved it will become more difficult to do so in the future, at the rate that highly-skilled immigrants appear to be leaving there may not be a such a positive factor of immigration in the future so that the nation can benefit economically.
Source
http://business.time.com/2012/10/11/vivek-wadhwa-stop-the-u-s-highly-skilled-immigrant-exodus-now/
Read more: http://business.time.com/2012/10/11/vivek-wadhwa-stop-the-u-s-highly-skilled-immigrant-exodus-now/#ixzz292NUqREP
Read more: http://business.time.com/2012/10/11/vivek-wadhwa-stop-the-u-s-highly-skilled-immigrant-exodus-now/#ixzz292LyPd00
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/15/us/immigration-deferred-deportation/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis article I found was “Undocumented immigrants line up for relief from deportation”written by the CNN Wire Staff. This article is based on Barack Obama’s new policy; the Dream Act and how immigrants have high hopes of not having to fear deportation.
This article relates to one of this week’s readings “We the People, Chapter 37” in which in both articles the idea of immigration and how it affects the United States is touched upon both articles. In “We the People, Chapter 37” the idea of immigration brings an increase in population to the United States and the country would be more racially and ethnically diverse. However some Americans disagreed with the idea of an increase in diversity. Some argued “ if large groups of immigrants do not learn to speak English and continue to adhere to cultural practices that [brings] conflict with fundamental American principles”. This is similar to what the Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer thinks. Since the the program, Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals does not guarantee public benefits, Governor Brewer took the advantage to issue an executive order “ directing state agencies to deny benefits -- including driver’s licenses -- to deferred action recipients. Finally, Obama believes that the young immigrants are talented people and with all purposes our considered Americans. Therefore, the policy change “is the right thing to do”, as stated by Barack Obama.
The authors, the CNN Wire Staff, do provide strong evidence. The CNN Wire Staff include statistical exemplification to make their argument valid and accurate. Also the article contains a video at the top of the article young illegal immigrants are shown applying for deferred action in order to stay in the country for two years legally. The CNN Wire Staff uses statistics to show how many hispanic immigrants would qualify for the program.
Immigration is a key idea in both the article I found and “We the people, Chapter 27” because they both concentrate on the idea of the United States increasing and establishing more diversity in order to have more power.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe article “Californians hold positive views of immigrants; most oppose deportation” by Cathleen Decker is one that speaks about the change in people’s perspectives who before saw immigrants as a burden and now see them as a benefit to the state. This was seen in a Los Angeles Times/USC which concluded that 48% of votes who are likely to cast a ballot in November said they were a benefit, 38% strongly held that particular view, while only 32% said immigrants were a “burden” to California and 22% felt very strongly about that.
ReplyDeleteThis article connects to this week’s topic because this article speaks about the believed impact of immigrants and whether it they can be categorized as a burden or as a benefit based on individual opinions taken in a poll. This relates to We The People, Chapter 37 because it speaks on how America is the land of immigrants and it’s descendants for four centuries. This text also includes predictions that state that the population will reach four hundred million and more, this increase will occur because of immigration by the year 2050. We The People, Chapter 37 includes that recent immigrants enrich economy, culture, and educational institutes which is similar to the feelings of a large percentage of the poll taken by the Los Angeles times.
The evidence that demonstrates this text is credible is that it is an article in the Los Angeles Times which is a news source in Southern California which was established in 1881 that was the second largest metropolitan newspaper in the United States in the year 2008 and the fourth widely distributed in the nation. This confirms that it is a reliable newspaper since it will not provide false information that will endanger their business and future opportunities involving profits. This article is also seen to be credible because it states that the poll was conducted for The Los Angeles Times and the USC College of Letters, Arts and Sciences by a Democratic polling firm named Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and a Republican firm named American Viewpoint. The article also lists the sample size of the poll which was 1,501 California voters and 922 possible voters, as well as the margin of sampling error which is 3.2.
Decker the author of this article uses strong evidence to support her argument that larger percentages of people in California are having a positive outlook on immigration and are seeing it as a benefit rather than a burden. Decker uses statistical exemplification to do so by including that, “Liberals were most supportive of immigrants legal and illegal, with 75% saying immigrants were a benefit and 81% saying that working illegal immigrants should be able to keep their jobs.” Here the author is very specific about the people who were included in this group and their responses. This evidence allows the reader to see through numbers that in reality percentages of the California population side with immigrants.
Immigrants are seen to be beneficial towards the United States. In We The People, Chapter 37 the author writes about how diversity creates new challenges in this section includes it that,”... like their predecessors, enrich the nation’s economy,culture, and educational institutions.” This expands to the idea that immigrants help the nation flourish in aspects that affect the nation as a whole similarly in “Californians hold positive views of immigrants; most oppose deportation” Decker writes, “... but a new Los Angeles Times/USC poll found that voters hold positive views about immigrants overall and favor accommodating illegal immigrants who have held down jobs in the state.” Immigrants are seen to be overall beneficial towards the nations because they provide labor towards jobs that are very much needed in the nation.
~Karina Tavarez
Karla Arroyo
ReplyDeleteHonors Civics
Mr. Rochowicz
10/11/12
The text I found, "The Pursuit of Happiness. America, live up to the ideals of your Declaration of Independence" by Adnan Al-Daini elaborates on the idea of democracy and the pursuit of happiness- the text describes the ignorant focus that America puts on finances, and not equality. This text connects to one of the class' topic of this week: equality because it offers a democratic perspective which argues against republican perspectives. For instance, the author, Adnan Al-Daini states, "Capitalism needs to be regulated and controlled...the state should be involved in helping the poor and the needy to attain a basic standard that affords them human dignity compatible with a rich democratic society. Our collective humanity requires us to do that." Al-Daini emphasizes on the well being of an economy to satisfy American society. In relation, Michael J. Sandel agrees with the welfare of a society when he writes, "Why do we care [about prosperity]… The most obvious answer is that we think prosperity makes us better off than we would otherwise be — as individuals and as a society. Prosperity matters, in other words, because it contributes to our welfare" (19). Sandel also offers a democratic perspective to show that equality and satisfaction are great fundamentals in American society which can lead to great prosperity. This text is credible for a few reasons. Firstly, the first paragraph of the text is a citation from late president, Thomas Jefferson. Secondly, the author uses one perspective towards the topic but is aware that there may be other views such as those who believe America is living up to our ideals. This occurs when Al-Daini states, "America, your wars violate every tenet of your Declaration of Independence: " that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" . For the sake of humanity, live up to those universal ideals" (Paragraph 10). Al-Daini delivers a clear point of view which provides historical evidence to back it up.
Nevertheless, Al-Daini would agree with "We the People" on voter participation for a few reasons. According to my text, Al-Daini is a strong believer in America's founding ideals and suggests us, as a society to not allow our values to be violated. In "We the People", there is a focus on voting participation. Although it is arguable whether America is a democracy or not- every individual should be able to have a say; in that case-- vote. The idea of "one man, one vote" should be emphasized more than it already is, because every citizen that is authorized to vote should be able to choose a representative for the country they reside in. By that means, due to the "lack of civic engagement", every American citizen should adhere to their own opinion.
Link to source: http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Pursuit-of-Happiness--by-Adnan-Al-Daini-110103-462.html
http://www.academia.edu/821648/Civic_engagement_patterns_of_undocumented_Mexican_students-2010
ReplyDeleteThe source I found this week is a journal written by a team of professors titled “Civic Engagement Patterns of Undocumented Mexican Student” by William Perez, Roberta Espinoza, Karina Ramos, Heidi Coronado and Richard Cortes. The journal speaks about the involvement of undocumented youth, first generation and second generation youth how socially engaged they are. This connects to Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam since Putnam states “The proportion of Americans saying that most people can be trusted fell by more than a third between 1960, when 58 percent chose that alternative, and 1993, when only 37 percent did” This connects to my source since it is mentioned in the journal that “though the United States Supreme Court mandates that undocumented children in public schools be accepted as students, because of current immigration policies, they are not accepted as citizens”(246). The mistrust Americans about one another extends to others to a worsening degree, making Americans apprehensive about accepting someone from outside as a part of their nation when they mistrust their own. While the journals talks about the benefits of civic engagement and shows information about how the naturalized and undocumented youth of America are helping others more than Americans, the percentage 1.5 and second generation participated in some form of civic engagement was higher than those non-immigrant Americans Putnam on the other hand talks about the decay of civic engagement “Every year over the last decade or two, millions more have withdrawn from the affairs of their communities”. This is evident to him because he has not studied the undocumented Americans just those that have been naturalized. Both pieces talks about the civic engagement, Putnam argues that it is in decay while the journal proves that it is in the rise. “Stepick, Stepick, and Labissiere (2008) find that 80% of first-generation, 90% of 1.5 generation, 89% of second-generation college freshman in South Florida volunteered or had done community service in the past 12 months” the percentage of those that participate in volunteer work actually rises which contradicts Putnam’s argument that it is in the decline
My source is credible because it cites multiple sources for just one sentence, Hodgkinson & Weitzman, 1997; Nolin, Chaney, Chapman, & Chandler, 1997; Youniss, Mclellan, & Mazer, 2001) also contain 3 pages of references used through the journal. Since every one of the authors focus is related to the journal’s content which makes them credible since their areas of expertise are connected to it. The author’s uses different information table to prove their point with each column showing statics about the demographic. Also there is statistics such has “80% of first-generation, 90% of 1.5 generation, 89% of second-generation college freshman in South Florida volunteered or had done community service in the past 12 months compared with 87% of nonimmigrant students. The rates for the 1.5 and second-generation students was higher than the 82.6% reported” (248).
http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2012/oct/04/civil-discourse-prevails/
ReplyDeleteThe article I found was “President Debate: Civil discourse prevails.” The article discusses the exemplification of civil discourse in the first presidential debate between Obama and Romney.
The article relates to chapter 37 of “We the People,” where the author discusses how civil discourse helps address challenges facing our nation. He includes how “personal attacks, deliberate falsehoods, and negativity,” have gotten in the way of productive distributions of perspective towards challenges facing us. Finding the civil exchange of ideas can make it easier to agree on a solution and includes the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to describe the rules of debate set forward by our forefathers. The article I found points out several actions performed by the candidates during their debate. Both men were able to comply with the rules of the debate. During the debate, the candidates discussed the issues relating to our deficit. This proves how they were able to bring forward their ideas in a calm and orderly matter while debating instead of vigorously attacking each other or bringing piercing negativity; simply following the rules of debate, following civil discourse.
The article I found, from the GO San Angelo Standard-Times, is a credible source because it is a news source from San Angelo, Texas. Similar to any state news corporation, staff and reporters work and research to provide information towards a subject. The author as well, Connie Cass, is from the Associated Press of the site.
The author, Connie Cass, uses expert testimony to provide a strong point. He mentions Jennifer Mercieca, a Texas A&M associate professor who studies political discourse, to point out how both candidates are knowledgeable towards the country’s economy. Furthermore, she uses testimony from Robert Denton Jr., head of the Communications Department at Virginia Tech to explain Romney’s behavior during the debate, "[Romney] was aggressive without being perceived as annoying or disrespectful."
The texts are both similar in the way they portray the ideas of how a debate should look like, where the participating sides are following the rules set forward by the Constitutional Convention of 1787. It would become an agreement that these rules, such as close listening, attention, and addressing the problems, should be followed to encourage an efficient debate on matters, therefore mutual feels can conclude in evolvements and solutions.
The text I found is "The Nation: Mexican-Americans; Forging a New Vision of America's Melting Pot" by Gregory Rodriguez, a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. This article discusses how Mexican immigrants "make up about two thirds of all Latinos in the United States" and how the views of the nation will change throughout the 21st century.
ReplyDeleteThis article connects to We the People, chapter 37, because at the beginning of the text it states how the U.S Census Bureau predicts that by the year of 2050 there will be some significant changes in the United States. One of these changes consist the United States being more racially and ethnically diverse and approximately twenty-four percent of the population will be Hispanics. This connects to the article when Rodriguez states, "... They are the second largest immigrant group in American history--the largest when including illegal immigrants". The more Hispanics living in the US, the more variation in race and culture.
The text I found is credible because it’s posted by the New York Times. The New York Times is a prestigious news organization in the United States. The source is also credible because it states statistics in which it strengthens the argument. In addition, it cites other sources, websites and it consist of citations. If this source wasn’t credible the New York Times will lose the millions of readers it has.
The author, Gregory Rodriguez, does exemplify strong evidence. One evidence that he shows is when he says, "According to James P. Smith and economist and immigration scholar at the RAND corporation, by 2050 more than 40 percent of United States Hispanics will be able to claim multiple ancestries". Another strong evidence is when he states statistics such as, "A Census Bureau study released last month found that about 10 percent of United States residents are foreign-born, midway between the high of 15 percent at the turn of the 20th century and the low of 5 percent in 1970".
We the People, chapter 37, and The Nation: Mexican- Americans Forging a New Vision of America's Melting Pot has various relationships. In chapter 37, it says "America has been a land of immigrants and their descendants for four centuries". Gregory Rodriguez will agree and add on that, "Throughout American history, immigrants and minority groups, seeking to make room for themselves, have broadened the definition of America". Rodriguez believes that these immigrants, specifically hispanics have expanded the views and the definition of America by letting racial, ethnic and cultural groups collide to create new ways of being American. This connects to chapter 37 because "Others worry that there are limits to how much diversity the country can absorb, particularly if large groups of immigrants do not learn to speak English and continue to adhere to cultural practices that conflict with the fundamental of American principles". Rodriguez will respond to this statement by stating "The process of they becoming us will ultimately force us to reconsider the very definition of who we are". This is justifying that the more immigrants coming to the United States the more flexible the definition and views of America will be. Without immigrants living in this country there will be no such thing as America. Therefore, immigrants are the ones who created America and since individuals are from different culture and have different believes, the definition should be interpreted in various ways not just one specifically.
The text I found this week was “For Voters It’s Still the Economy Energy, Terrorism, Immigration Less Important Than in 2008”. In this article, the author uses statistical data to show that from 2008 to present day, voters’ priorities have somewhat changed.
ReplyDeleteThis article relates to We the People, Chapter 37 because both suggest that American is undergoing some sort of change. In the first article, we see that American voters have changed their ideologies, and in Chapter 37, we see the implications of future changes that may occur in the United States.
“For Voters it’s Still the Economy Energy, Terrorism, Immigration Less Important Than in 2008” is credible for numerous reasons. The article is part of The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. Pew is a public and independent opinion research organization that studies attitudes toward politics, the press and public policy issues. This source serves as a valuable and reliable informational resource for scholars, citizens, political leaders and other journalists.
The author of “For Voters it’s Still the Economy Energy, Terrorism, Immigration Less Important Than in 2008” uses statistical evidence to strengthen and support their argument. For example, as seen in the chart on the link (http://www.people-press.org/files/2012/09/9-24-12-1.png) it is clear that voters’ number one priority has not changed since 2008 until now. The reader is able to comprehend the data and understand what point the author is trying to make because there is visual representation of it.
If the Pew Research Center were to read Chapter 37 of We the People, there would be some sort of conflict. This being because, in We the People, the author makes some harsh predictions that contradicts/may affect the validity of Pew’s research. For example, in We the People the author expects most of the increase in population resulting from immigration. However, in the Pew Research, it seems that individuals do not care about immigration. On the contrary, in We the People we learn that the cost of water, oil and natural gas will surprisingly soar. And in the Pew Research, energy was not an important electoral issue to voters.
The text I found this week is “How civically engaged are Millennials?” by Judy Woodruff. This texts talk about how the generation born after 1980(Millennials) are becoming less interested in there environment than pervious than other generations. She states how there’s been “a decline in young people's ‘trust in others, their interest in government and the time they said they spent thinking about social problems’”. She then relates this to Jean Twenge book “Generation me” and speak about how young people are becoming more self involved and narcissistic. Twenge says young people “put ‘earning lots of money, being well-off financially and being in a position of authority’ ahead of concern for others or for the community”. Judy also speaks about how others oppose Twenge’s idea that the younger generations are becoming less civically engaged than the ones before.
ReplyDeleteThis text connects to the idea of civic engagement addressed in “Bowling Alone" America's Declining Social Capital”. Judy says that there’s a decrease of civil engagement within the younger generation. She states how Twenge believe this is younger people are more concerned about themselves than getting involved in government while others like Peter Levine believes “that young people are engaging in different ways”.
This text is credible because Judy Woodruff an American news anchor and journalist who worked for CNN, NBC, and PBS wrote it. It is also credible because it on PBS, which is a public broadcasting, center in the U.S. Another way that you can tell this source is credible is because it sites other books and sources based on this topic.
Judy uses many sources to back up her argument. She uses the “journal of personality and social Psychology” and “Generation X” to prove her opinion of the younger generation. Then she uses Criticism from peter Levine, Mike Hais and Morley Winograd to show the opposing side of the argument.
“Bowling Alone" America's Declining Social Capital” by Robert D. Putnam and “How civically engaged are Millennials?” by Judy Woodruff both talk about civic in engagement. Robert talks the how important civil engagement is and how some people allow the government to do whatever they want. While talks about how young people are becoming less civically engaged. If the younger generation isn’t civically involved this could cause the people’s power to potentially weaken and it could also hurt the government as a whole. But as peter Levine states there are different ways the younger generation can be involved such as social networks, which Putman states are important “ for job placement and many other economic outcomes”(2).
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/03/how-civically-engaged-are-millennials.html
The article I choose is called "Cuttingbacks and the Fate of the Young" written by Eduardo Porter. This article has to do with how our children and grandchildren would have to be paying our debates we leave or our parents leave after their deaths, Mitt Romney gave that reminder. This article connects to the class this week about "U.S. political parties and political values",it connects because Mitt Romney is trying to make laws and want the people to vote for him.So his making all these plan arrangement but many people dont argue on what his trying to do. And by him making these decision is making it worst for him for people to vote for him because his just trying to get young people not to vote for him cause they going to think his going to put them in a bigger debate.Its not going to be fair that our children or grandchildren should have to pay our debates after our deaths.The article I found online is credible because its from the New York Times, a world wide newspaper that is strongly trusted and read by many people around the world.The author from my article presents strong statements/evidence about his arguments and its point getting across.For example "Mitt Romney reminded us that it is our children, and grandchildren, who will end up paying for our budget deficits. His comment about the immorality of passing on such a large bill is a welcome reminder that our generation bears responsibility for the well-being of the next". Mitt Romney wanting our children to have to stay with our debates its really hard because that would be money of our children that they would be wasting paying our debates when they could use for something else.and its also would be harder for our children one day take out a loan or taking money lend from the bank or anything that has to do with the use of money.Also if they ever study they would also have to be paying the money the barrow.So that would make it harder cause on top of paying their own debates they will be have to pay their parents debates as well its going to be too much money and they wont be able to have fun or one day go on vacation of paying some many things.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/10/business/cutbacks-and-the-fate-of-the-young.html?ref=healthinsuranceandmanagedcare&_r=0
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6410264
ReplyDeleteIn this interview Mr. Joe Trippi discusses the impact of technology on political campaigns. He discusses the role of the internet on political campaigns and how authenticity is key to making sure you are “real” when publicized through the internet.
This text connects to this week reading from We The People specifically regarding the technology aspect of the reading and its role in future government. It says that due to the advancement of technology and influence in political followers can inform them but as well overwhelm them with information. Mr. Joe Trippi also talks about the influence of technology in politics but in a more current perspective as how programs like YouTube, Facebook, and MySpace help the voters stay inform and candidates being able to post negative things about each other. This source credibility can be measure by the fact that Mr. Joe Trippi is the author of The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. Also the source is from NPR books which are a known source for author reviews and interviews as well as a place where people can buy books.
Mr. Trippi in supporting his argument that technology has increased the influence of politics uses several examples like social networking programs and a presidential election that happened in the 60’s between Nixon and John F. Kennedy. He describes the technological impact of the television and the radio as a way to show the contrasts both create on the public. The television made it looked as if Kennedy won while the radio made it seem as if Nixon won and this difference occurred because of the voice projected in the radio and appearance in television, which proves how technology presents a role in politics and its followers.
Both the authors of We The People and Mr. Trippi in his interview discus the impact of technology not only in the future but currently as well. In We The People technology is portrayed as a good informer at first but it doesn’t cover all the aspects of the arguments or its credibility which creates bias not only on the information but on the reader as well. In Mr. Trippi’s interview he talks about the roles of different types of innovation that lead to advancement in politics and audiences as well. He says “I mean what happens on MySpace is you sort of create your own friends circle, or - and so, you know, to the extent that Evan Bayh can create thousands and thousands of friends within the MySpace community, mostly young people, it's important. And he - it's a new way to reach people. It's a new channel. Some of the smarter candidates understand that they've got to join these communities and get involved in the conversation.” The authors of We The People would agree with this concept but also mention the negative impact of this kind of communication which is the credibility factor and the bias it creates for the candidate involved in the discussion, which leads to a “blind” campaign.
America is said to be the land of immigration in chapter 37 of "We The People". America is the land of opportunity thus many decided to immigrate to America for that very reason. The problem is that immigration is currently very high so it is questioned whether immigration is harming the American economy or whether it's a benefit. The article, "Report Warns Easing Immigrants' Path to Citizenship Will Further Harm Economy" by Kelley Vlahos of Fox news elaborates on each side of this debate. This article discusses one of the effects of the increase in diversity in the country caused by mass immigration.
ReplyDeleteThis article was published by Fox News which is a widely recognized cable news channel. It is also a trusted news source since many people watch it because Fox News is trustworthy. If Fox News were to suddenly publish false information then it would suddenly lose all of its viewers and would lose a lot of money. Fox News does not want to ruin its reputation so it makes sure to only publish accurate and credible information. In the article the Federation for Immigration Reform is quoted in order to show statistics such as "1.1 million new legal immigrants accepted annually, less than 6 percent “were admitted because they possessed skills deemed essential to the U.S. economy.” Kelley Vlahos, the writer of the article, also quotes Dan Griswold, who is the head of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, to show the countering side.
Chapter 37 of "We The People" expresses the challenges that America faces now and will face in the future. One of the challenges is diversity which is linked to immigration. It touches on how the increase of diversity-caused by immigration-is threatening the American culture yet on the flip side, it's strengthening America as a nation. On page 278 it states, "The American goal of e pluribus unum-out of many, one-usually has been achieved by balancing the benefits of a diverse society with the unifying influence of a common civic culture and constitutional ideals" America is a land where diversity is intertwined with the American ideals; it's what makes America. The chapter continues on to say, "One of the major challenges now and for the future is to sustain that balance" (278). The article, "Report Warns Easing Immigrants' Path to Citizenship Will Further Harm Economy", puts into question whether that balance is being sustained today. In the article, Kelley Vlahos states that, "illegal immigrants are already competing with native-born Americans for jobs, particularly low-wage, unskilled service jobs." Some people/organizations such as Federation for Immigration Reform (FAIR) believe that the increase of immigration is threatening he American people because they are replacing American workers. Although America finds diversity as an important factor, it does not want it to take over and replace the American culture-or people in this sense. The goal-as stated before-is that American wants diversity but it wants diversity to work with the American ideals. In relation, the article quotes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce who state, “Immigrants do not ‘steal’ jobs from American workers. Immigrants come to the United States to fill jobs that are available, or to establish their own businesses." This is a clear example of America sustaining the balance. America allows immigration because immigrants work with Americans in the work force; helping the economy in the end. Both chapter 37 of "We The People" and the article, "Report Warns Easing Immigrants' Path to Citizenship Will Further Harm Economy" by Kelley Vlahos point out how America is a very diverse country due to immigration but it works since diversity is what makes this country.