Essay Instructions: I had to respond to write the below. Now I have to have someone respond to my comment. I just need you to respon to what I wrote below. Just need you to respond as if you were discussing what I wrote. i.e you agree or not or just any relpy to each of the below.
Thanks so much!
------------------------
Pretend that you were a typical 20-year-old Japanese-American in 1942. Describe the circumstances in which you lived at that time. What is your response to the American army's request that you serve in the armed forces of the United States? Why?
I wrote:
1)Being a 20 year old Japanese American in 1942 was profound. In the first month of the year I would be living a life in a city on the West Coast iwth my family where my father would own his own deli in the space below my apartment. One day in February in 1942, president Roosevelt issued the Executive Order 9066making the American military to force all of my family and friends who were also Japanese- Americans into internment camps. My father would be forced to sell his very successful deli as well as give up all of our belongings. All the family heirlooms would be the hardest to give up. We did not fight going into the camps because we knew the consequences would be severe if we resisted the military. Soon, some would be allowed to be released to go to college, work in factories and some to serve in the United States military. My brother would serve in the military so he could provide for our family when we were released. The camps would be uncomfortable and it would be hard being uprooted from everything I knew.
Please respond:
-----------------------
I wrote:
2)My response to such a request might have been a ready and enthusiastic 'yes' prior to December 7, 1941. The day the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour changed that for me. Now I have mixed feelings--I want to fight for America, my country of birth but the enemy is the country of my parents and ancestors. Given the anti-Japanese sentiment in the country after that attack, I am afraid of the anger and resentment I might possibly encounter as I serve with other American soldiers who consider themselves more "American" than myself.
The enemy speaks my language, looks like me and shares my culture and customs but that is where any similiarity between us ends. My parents have been 'relocated' to a remote camp in the California desert, may never reclaim their home and belongings but would never forsake this, their adopted country. I want to volunteer to serve the country I now belong to. I've heard the the Japanese units already serving have outstanding records in combat thus far and I would like to join them in that distinction. I want to prove that I am a loyal American and no one is going to impugn my loyalty to America. This country has been good to my family and so I will heed the call to serve, despite resentment at having my honor, loyalty and character questioned.
Please respond:
--------------
Martin Luther King, Jr., observed that President Johnson's desire to end poverty and provide economic opportunity for all Americans was "shot down on the battlefields of Vietnam." Do you agree with King's statement? Why or why not?
I wrote:
No I do not entirely agree with King?s statement. He is reaching to make a connection between the conditions here, which no one claims were ideal, and the war in Vietnam. Yes, we all can espouse Christian ideals but at the same time we have to look at the actions of the enemy, in this case North Vietnam supported by Communist China, which had (and has) no regard for human rights.
We must also look at the fact that we were not the primary or original agressor in Vietnam. Although the subject is complex, North Vietnam wanted to exert a totalitarian form of government over what was effectively a separate country which had a valid and legitimate government. If we accept Christian ideals as King claims to, we should support the true freedom of ALL men. Certainly North Vietnam did not espouse individual freedom in any way, shape or form. Just as King says his calling takes him beyond national allegiances? (BV, par 15) so too, did America?s calling in protecting the freedoms of ALL people--which is the highest calling of a Christlike nature.
King says, ?I could not be silent in the face of such cruel manipulation of the poor? (BV, par 10). What is often forgotten is that the US had a treaty responsibility through SEATO (South East Asia Treaty Organization), much like today's NATO wherein we have a legal and moral obligation to defend an attack on any of the organization members just as we would defend England or Italy today. I do not see that as cruel manipulation of the poor in America. In spite of what some people would call King's good intentions, his attempt to connect two subjects was not ethically or morally fair.
As for Lyndon Johnson, he intiated and got passed some of the most extensive civil rights legislation this country had ever seen.
Please respond:
--------------
New topic:
offer a substantive comment on Dr. Cornel West's analysis of the King legacy and the Obama administration.
I wrote:
I agree with Dr Cornel West who echoes King that one will not learn how to love others if they do not start in their own family, neighborhoods, and synagogues (West on King 1). I also agree that the Obama administration has not done a good job and has used funds improperly to bail out a variety of companies that were ?too big to fail? (West on King 2). However, his assessment fails to take into account the massive damages to everyone regardless of color, that the failure of AIG could have caused to the American people. There was a valid reason to prevent the failure of AIG as distasteful at it was, and the same does not apply to bailing out a segment of society simply because Dr West sees them as under privileged.
To some extent, I agree with Dr Cornel West?s assessment that President Obama has done little specifically for the African American community. Dr West in part echoes a common cry?the cry of victimhood. He emphasizes that the government has not ?come through? with opportunities for ?Jamal and Leticia? (West on King 2). Why is it the government?s responsibility to come with opportunities for Jamal or Leticia or myself, Tanya single mother?
In these neighborhoods where bullets are flying, as West says, it?s black on black crime chiefly among those who have failed to avail themselves of any substantive education. A common retort in these areas and this is according to Bill Cosby and other high profile ?black leaders?, that it is a sell out to ?speak and be like whitey?. So it may not necessarily be the genius?s who overcome but rather many fail to excel beyond their circumstances due to this attitude. Many choose not to participate in education and then complain that they can?t get a job. How do you create jobs out of thin air? Equal opportunity as espoused by Dr King, is not the same as ensuring equal results regardless of skill, talent or determination.
Please respond:
