I feel that the reasoning for hatred against immigrants is quite apparent—one being that they are prime targets to use as scapegoats for economic problems. When things go wrong and take a turn for the worst, it is always easiest to blame it on the “little guy” instead of taking partial or full responsibility. Immigrants clearly do not have enough political power to fight back, and Americans are aware of this. Furthermore, they are largest groupings of people besides Americans (but we are not going to blame ourselves). Just looking at what is occurring today, American citizens are losing their jobs left and right, so naturally it is the fault of all Mexicans crossing over the border to take our jobs away and has nothing to do with the choices we and our government have made (and I mean that very sarcastically). I personally find this quite absurd because, like Sam mentioned before, it is not as if American citizens who have been laid off are going to take the jobs that an immigrant would. No former real estate agent is going to pack up and head for California to pick crops. Additionally, people probably feel that they are being cheated because the immigrants are able to fly under the radar and thus do not have to pay taxes. And, of course, no one wants to feel cheated hence leading to contempt of immigrants for not playing by the rules.

The other reason is that people obviously feel threatened that immigrants will take over our country and we will soon be the minority. The unease of Spanish suddenly popping up wherever we go is evident within the nation. People always tend to feel uncomfortable with the unknown and customs that differ from their own. When people start to feel that there are “invaders” of their territory, it is natural to become protective of what they feel is theirs. In some way it reminds me of how dogs mark their territory if another dog is brought onto their property. The fear seems to manifest itself into this anger that many Americans feel, and they let out their anger through the cruelty and mistreatment.

After being made aware in class of how immigrants treat other immigrants regardless of if they are from the same country, it certainly does not help immigrants’ image if they are disrespecting each other. The animosity that they show towards each other only further justifies Americans’ hatred for immigrants. At least if the groups of immigrants could come together and put their differences aside to become united, they would have a better chance of standing up for themselves and fight back against the hostility.

I, myself, am not totally against immigration nor do I “hate on” immigrants. However, I do feel that there does need to be some ramifications to prevent situations such as overpopulation.

Before the lecture about affirmative action versus nepotism, I was one of those people who was strongly against affirmative action because I felt it was unjust and were giving people advantages who may not deserve them—and I did not have a second thought about this. I will be the first to admit that before this class, I did not even know the definition of nepotism. So when Sam discussed the meaning and how it compared to affirmative action, I began to understand why affirmative may not be so bad, or at least as unfair as nepotism is. Like a majority of students, I have, myself, benefitted from nepotism by receiving internships through my parents’ contacts. And again, I did not think twice about it.

So now that I realize the true meaning, do I think nepotism is good or bad? To be honest, I do not think it is either or—I think it is both. I personally feel that it can be good because whether we like it or not, that is how a great deal of us get jobs today. And for the most part, whoever recommends an individual for a job generally will not recommend a total incompetent failure (though I realize there are exceptions). So at least the employer knows and has access to more personal information about that prospective employee rather than some random person from a pool of applicants.

On the other hand, nepotism is bad because it does take away a job opportunity from someone who might actually be more qualified and hard working than the person who received the job. And it does give more of an advantage to whites because the truth is whites are more likely to have contacts in higher up positions and have more contacts readily available in general while the same probably could not be said for minorities (of course, these are all components of the free will versus determinism debate and contributes to cycle of impoverished minorities who are struggling to get out of their rut). It can also be seen in a negative light because it does not teach people to have to work hard to get to the top. If, let’s say, I had been getting jobs wherever and whenever I wanted since high school because my father is some CEO of company, what incentive do I have to maintain a diligent work ethic since I had always been given what I want and never had to work for it?

Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing, nepotism will always exist in our society. I am constantly being told how great Penn State is for networking, and I am bound to get a job through Penn State connections. Though these advantages may not be fair, the best thing we can do is put 100% of our efforts into our jobs and prove that we deserve that spot just as much as the next person.

I am most definitely one of those people that Sam talked about in the beginning of class who is completely against war. Of course, I am not educated enough to know all the complicated details involved in foreign or internal affairs nor do I know enough to seriously be able to judge whether it is actually necessary to go to war or not. That being said, though, I am the typical female who is all about peace and not war and searching for alternatives to combat. So if one were to ask me before this lecture how many innocent people I would be willing to kill in order to get rid of the one person I am seeking, my immediate answer would be zero. In fact, even during lecture when Sam threw out that information about the number twenty-nine, I was initially horrified at the thought of even taking one innocent person’s life and then confused as to why twenty-nine and who designated that number. What if that one person is not as dangerous as another—shouldn’t the number of people differ for the two of them?

During discussion an interesting point was brought up. Someone asked how many innocent people you would be willing to kill for one person if you knew that that one person was going to commit a horrific act such as Osama Bin Laden’s; twenty-nine lives for thousands. This made me think—of course I would choose to take those twenty-nine lives if I knew I could save all those who perished on 9/11. But if I was not American and those twenty-nine people were of my homeland and maybe I even knew one of them personally, how would I feel then? Would I still find it justifiable to take those twenty-nine lives? Probably not. This led me to continue on with this idea and question who gives anyone the right to take even one person’s life? What makes it acceptable to kill the mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters of other people just to save our own? In retrospect, it really is such a complicated issue with no correct solution because there are countless ways to view the situation.

Before the lecture I probably would have been angered by the 29:1 statistic and felt whoever made those decisions was immoral. However, I realize that this is not the case and there is more to it than I could possibly imagine. Now my answer to original question posed has changed from “zero” to “pass”. I really have absolutely no idea and as stated before, do not know enough to make that call. I would still like the answer to be zero as I am still opposed to war, but after this lecture it definitely got me thinking more critically and made me realize how much I truly do not know.

It is ironic because when Sam gave his lecture on different languages and multiculturalism, I immediately thought of the overnight camp I had attended as a camper and worked at as a counselor for years. It had at one point changed location and management, but that is a whole different story. One of the camp’s founders came from Mexico and therefore brought in a lot Mexicans as both campers and counselors. By the time I was a camper, it was extremely diverse with campers and counselors from around the globe, though a majority was still American and Mexican; however, there were a good amount of internationals. Before the camp changed location and directors, the director at the time (who was American) would force everyone to speak in English regardless of how well you knew the language. I remember as a camper frequently witnessing girls (because it was an all-girl camp) being scolded for speaking in Spanish by the counselors, and I would always think how cruel the counselors were for forcing them to speak in a language they clearly were not comfortable with. It was not until I became a counselor myself that I discovered they were not doing it out of spite, but rather the director would harshly scold counselors during staff meetings if she saw them letting campers converse in another language.

I truly hated this policy. I understood that a big reason why parents of international campers sent their children to camp in America was to learn the language, but these girls were surrounded by English speakers and most of the time they did not have a choice but to speak in English because that is all a lot of the campers and counselors spoke, so they were getting their fulfillment of “practice”. And I also realize that they were told to speak in English so that everyone could understand and not feel left out. But on the contrary, the international campers often times felt excluded because they could not grasp the language as easily, especially since most native speaking campers and counselors would talk at a normal pace, which was fast for the international camper. There would be times at camp where I would sit around with my friends, and we would discuss how we could not even imagine being sent to another country, which was unfamiliar territory, living there without their parents for at least a month, and then on top of all that, not being allowed to speak in the language they were most comfortable with. Of course it could be considered “character building” and a way to develop important skills, but I still felt during the period of free time when we didn’t have classes or weren’t interacting in large group, it was unfair to not allow the girls to converse with one another in their desired language.

Interracial relationships definitely appear to be a sore subject in today’s society. From my experience, though, it seems that the older generations, including my parents, grandparents, and so on, have more of an issue with interracial dating than someone of my generation or younger. Personally, I see no problem with dating another outside of your race. If you really love someone and care about them, then it should not matter what the color of his or her skin is or where he or she comes from. (In fact, I think that some of prettiest people are those that are born from parents who are two different races.)

A majority of relationships today are not interracial. However, I do not feel this is necessarily a result of racism. Of course, there is a handful of the population that look down upon interracial couples out of hatred for the other race, but just as we tend to choose friends who are the same race, people date others of the same race because it is who they are comfortable with. People of the same race generally share an understanding of where each other has come from and various common interests. The family background and other life experiences are usually more similar of those of the same race as compared to two different races. Thus, we are more compelled to stay in our comfort zone than step outside of our bubble.

I, myself, have never dated anyone outside of my race simply because I have never been attracted to anyone of a different race (except for the actor, Taye Diggs). I do not know if this makes me “racist”—I do not choose to be attracted to only white people, but it has always worked out that way. If I found someone that I was interested in but was not of my race, I would definitely consider dating him. I think it is important to be open to new experiences, and if it is the right person, I could end up gaining a great deal from the relationship. If I did, in fact, end up dating someone who was not white, I am honestly not sure how my parents would react. I know that they would not forbid it or go out of their way to make him feel uncomfortable or anything of that nature. But I do not know whether or not they would fully support it or even say something to me on the side. My mom has always instilled in me that it is very important to her that I raise my children Jewish, but those were the only stipulations she has ever expressed. I would hope that it would not matter to them as long as I am happy---whether it be with a white or nonwhite.

Do I feel guilty for being white? To be blatantly honest, no, I do not. I did not choose to be born white. I took no part in horrific genocides that occurred against minorities. I, myself, try my best to avoid acting or speaking in a way that would offend another race (of course, no one is perfect). Yes, there are times where I will hear others using racial slurs or doing something offensive towards other races, and since I am that type of person that goes out of their way to avoid conflict, I will not say anything. These instances I will feel guilty afterwards, but not for being white. I feel guilty because I did not do the right thing by not saying anything. There have also been times in class where I feel bad for blacks or Hispanics or other such races because our society has made it more difficult for them to succeed, and in that sense, it just is not fair. But again, I do not feel guilty, as I have no reason to. It is not my fault employers will statistically hire a white criminal over a black, law-abiding citizen. It is not my fault Native Americans have such low family incomes. However, it is my responsibility, then, to make sure that actions I take and decisions I make are unbiased and fair.

It was interesting to hear in class the other day the discussion about white people letting minorities get away with a lot more because they feel guilty. I can confidently and honestly say I have and will never let anyone try to take advantage of me or anyone else regardless of their race. Though I did mention that I tend to avoid confrontation, I will still stand up for myself if I feel I have truly been wronged. I have discussed in other blogs that I am not one for categorizing others by race and if it were up to me, I would choose to disregard classifying one’s race on all forms and applications—after all, we are all human and we all come from the same place. Therefore, why should it be acceptable for a Hispanic person to cut a white person in line?

I think it is important for peoplen stop using the, “I am this race, so feel bad for me” crap (my friend from Qatar tries to pull that stunt all of the time). This seems to further generate the unnecessary guilt. I also feel it is equally as important for people to not feel guilty about their race or anything that may have occurred in the past. Rather, everyone should make it a point to not repeat and refrain from any racist actions.

Affirmative action is undoubtedly a sore subject for many Americans across the nation. While I certainly see and understand its benefits and do feel to an extent that it is necessary, I do believe that affirmative action can be and often times is taken too far. In an ideal world, it should be the person who is more qualified to be hired for a job or accepted into a university regardless of the color of their skin. However, as we all know, our world is not perfect and not everyone is colorblind. Initially, I was completely against affirmative action simply because I was naïve and thought that this type of discrimination never or rarely occurred. But after learning about that study in lecture a few weeks back about more people with “white sounding” names being hired and a white criminal being the more likely candidate to get a job over a black person with no criminal record, I began to realize the importance of such legislation.

Going back to my original statement, though, it still can be an unjust system at times. If two potential employees are applying for only one available position, the employee with the best credentials and most promising work ethic should obviously receive the job regardless if they are white or black or Asian or any other race. It is utter—for lack of a better word—bullshit if one person is hired over another because the company needs to meet its diversity in the workplace requirements. If the employee who was not hired worked harder and put more effort into the application process, shouldn’t they be rewarded? Furthermore, these actions could be considered discrimination even though that is what affirmative action is set out to solve. The same goes with students applying for college. I have heard a few students who are considered minorities flat out admit that there is no way they would have gotten accepted by Penn State if they were white. They have shared their scores as well, and it angered me because I know many students who were and still are rejected with much higher scores. The students who truly put forth their best efforts clearly deserve to be accepted over those who either did not try or did not give it their all (and accepting the better student means that they are more likely to succeed and be productive for the university in the long-run). Personally, I do not even understand why it is required to identify our race on these applications, but that is a whole other issue.

Unfortunately, I, myself, can’t devise a feasible option to balance out the two sides. I definitely do feel, though, the some version of affirmative action is necessary and is a crucial step towards eliminating racial discrimination as much as possible.

It is difficult to say whether the choices of those in poverty to have more children could be considered selfish or not. If the parents are completely aware of their actions, then yes, I do believe they are being selfish. What I mean when I say completely aware of their actions is they are intentionally trying to have more children. They know how to properly use contraceptives and have access to these contraceptives. I do not believe that not being able to afford contraceptives is a sufficient excuse because if they are able to afford keeping themselves and their children alive, then they certainly can afford a box of condoms. If they are severely struggling to maintain a household and feed themselves as well as their children, then the choice for more offspring is nothing short of greediness (where is the fun in having twenty-two children anyway!?).

However, a decent amount of the time, these people either have no idea what they are doing or they simply cannot afford to avoid more children. Statistics show that those in poverty are less educated, often times dropping out before graduating high school. And for the most part, we learn safe sex through schooling. So part of the problem may be that the parents either do not know how to effectively use contraceptives or even what contraceptives exist. Furthermore, poorer areas tend to have inadequate education systems and either do not offer these sex ed classes or are not correctly teaching its students how to practice safe sex.

Another possible issue that may be further exacerbating the problem is not being able to afford to abort an unwanted pregnancy. Although I do not think that the condom broke all twenty-two times in Tammy’s parents’ case, this is still a complication for people who can’t even afford one child. An instance may have occurred where the contraceptive was not used properly, and the woman ends up impregnated. She may not want the baby, but having an abortion is not an option as there may not be any free abortion clinics in or around the area (and again, the less educated may not even know that these free abortion clinics exist).

So do I think that having these larger families is an act of selfishness? In some cases absolutely! The parents have no business adding to their list of mouths to feed and they’re only doing harm to their children in the end who will undoubtedly become malnourished and less cared for. On the other hand, it may be case where the parents truly do not any better for lack of education. Either way, big families are most definitely a huge contributing factor in the issue of poverty.

I personally do not necessarily believe that the modern police force can be classified as “racist”, however, I do not have the opportunity to see what goes on behind closed curtains. As a person on the outside looking in, it appears that police make arrests for legitimate reasons despite skin color. More police in urban areas may certainly attribute to a larger number of arrests. Additionally, I think that areas that are populated by less educated people tend to have a higher rate of crime and arrests. Statistics not only show that there is a significant lack of education in urban areas, but it has also proven that more minorities reside in urban areas as well. This may have an impact on why it seems that more African Americans are incarcerated than whites.

Going back to the notion that more police in urban areas are a factor in my opinion, to state the most obvious, more police enforcement inevitably leads to more arrests. Thus, it is not necessarily that these cities are committing more illegal acts than rural areas, it is simply more difficult to get away with these crimes. For instance, being from the suburbs of Philadelphia, I constantly hear on the news how the number of police are going to increase and “crackdown” in the rougher parts of the city---and by “crackdown” I mean the addition of cameras on every street corner and police patrolling the streets all day and all night. Naturally, this is going to result in an increase of the amount of people being thrown in jail. And a majority of these arrests are actually drug busts. However, I know that kids in my area and surrounding townships are always selling marijuana to one another, but they never get caught because there aren’t cameras everywhere and police lurking around twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Once again, statistically speaking, a good portion of the “rough” parts of city are comprised of minorities hence the reason for more minorities incarcerated from Philadelphia than whites.

As I previously stated, this is all based on how I view the justice system. I would like to believe that the men and women on the police force are honest, impartial people. However, I am aware that there is a chance that this may not accurate. A few years ago when the movie Crash came out, I saw an interesting interview with one of the actors who played a racist cop. In the interview he was questioned on whether or not he felt that there were actually cops like that who existed in our society. He immediately responded, “Without a doubt, yes. I hear stories all the time.” And though I, myself, haven’t heard any legitimate stories, it did open my eyes to a possibility.

It is quite apparent that racism is still very much a problem in our society. Personally, I can’t understand it. Why all the hatred? Why go out of your way to put someone else down because their skin is a different color. After a few lectures from Sam this semester, I realize now more than ever how truly alike we are all. We all originated from the same place; we are all capable of accomplishing the same tasks. So because someone else is not white or black or yellow or red, they are less of a person?

I think racism still exists for a number of reasons, but one of the big ones being that human beings have a natural tendency to want to feel inferior to others. And it seems as if people gain that inferiority complex by forcing others to feel below them. Bullies often pick on classmates at school so that they can feel better about themselves, and racism follows the same concept. It is as if people get a high from experiencing the torment of others.

Another reason why racism could still be prevalent is because it is what has been taught from previous generations. I personally have witnessed this first-hand by a girl I once knew who using racial slurs in a hateful manner. When I began to question her on where these feelings were coming from, she eventually realized that it was because her parents and grandparents had been expressing such feelings all her life, so she knew no better. And though this is just one example, I believe that it does apply to a majority of situations. Racism has become a vicious cycle—after all, our morals and values do come from our childhood experiences and what we have learned (and it has been proven that we often learn by modeling). I definitely think that racism is not as severe as it once was (although this may be my own ignorance), but because slavery and genocides and other events of that nature are relatively recent, the cycle has yet to be broken.

Part of the problem of racism nowadays is that people are using racial slurs in jest rather than in spite. Comedians are constantly bringing up the subject of race in their acts and movies utilize stereotypes for comedic relief. And racial slurs (and other derogatory terms) are becoming a part of our every day vocabulary (I hear people, whether they are black or white or Asian, calling each other the “n word” all the time and it just rubs me the wrong way). So now it is hard to distinguish between being funny and being racist. What may be offensive to one race is considerably laughable to others.