The Penn State student community is definitely going through the 5 stages of grief. I feel as if everyone, including myself is going through these stages on an individual basis but it helps to have a student community such as ours where we can communicate across the borders that previously divided us and come to a certain platitude of understanding about the things we are feeling collectively. I personally can recount that during yesterday’s events how tangible each stage felt. The minute news came in about Joe Pattern being fired from Penn State’s head coach position and being unable to coach this Saturday’s game, I remember feeling denial and actually hearing the people I was watching the news with say “It cannot be true.” I would propose that this collective denial roots from the fact that Joe Paterno already released a statement saying he will retire at the end of this season but that we will coach out Saturday’s game and every game subsequent to that. After this stage of denial though, people may go through stages faster or slower than other. Generally speaking though, we saw the manifestation of the Anger phase in last night’s riots. Personally I feel anger still and I am still kind of hoping that some type of bargain where he can coach one last game comes about. I think in the community though, we skipped the bargaining stage and are now in this state of depression. Today’s weather was a personification of what everyone was feeling. I am sure given last night’s hectic events and the fact that nothing changed has left a lot of students feeling powerless and feeling just overall sad. I would propose though that we will reach our Acceptance stage by Saturday when we realize that Joe Paterno is not going to be coaching his last game, nor is he coming back to Penn State. I personally have already reached this stage.

To begin with, I would speculate that the reason why so many people focus fervently on the costs of legal and illegal immigration is because they are perpetually perceived as society’s “other.” In this sense of the word they have managed to manipulate society’s view of these workers from underdeveloped countries as bogie men to be afraid of. Media and other modes of communication have rooted in the American subconscious that these workers are trying to steal “American” jobs or they’re gang members. I do not mean to assume that everyone perceives them in this fashion but because people as a society do, the collective then tend to reflect misconceptions rooted off from these two emotionally invoking possibilities. From these misconceptions one could draw conclusions or base their opinions on biased statistics that these illegal immigrants contribute nothing to the American economy or culture.
The pressing issue at matter here is that, in reality, immigrants legal or illegal contribute a lot to our economy and society. I base my conclusion on what Sam presented in class that vast portions of our agricultural economy rely heavily on the immigrant workforce. So I find it odd that many still harbor misconceptions such as that their experience as a “Hyphenated-American” worker is easier that than of the “average-American.” We seem to forget these terms are very flexible and have been since the beginning of our existence as a nation, thus a collective mixture of races. We have let ourselves come to believe that these documented and undocumented workers are somewhat of a threat because they are tickling the threads of “American” society. As much as I love my country, I have to admit we are no better than the perpetual 4th grade bully. Any threat to our immature pursuit of wealth and power is perceived as bad.
In my perception I am but one person who has not had all the evidence in front of me. Not to disregard Sam’s lectures, but I feel as if I might have a different opinion if I was exposed to or presented with the information he has. But who is to say. I cannot pretend to have answers. I definitely see both sides of the argument though. I hope in the future I will be ambitious enough to pursue that knowledge and carve my own opinion.

We use racial labels when they are unnecessary because for much the same reason why we use curses. We use them to express ourselves whether that is in anger and frustration. The difference between why we use curses and racial labels is dependent on who or what we are directing our anger towards. If we were wronged or anger with someone who is of a different race or ethnicity, and we feel that they wronged us as a result of them being different we use a racial slur or label. In situations where we would use a racial label such as when we describe our friends as being black or white when that has no bearing on what is happening in the story because we subconsciously believe that it does. If we are describing a situation where something out of the ordinary happens to us or our “black or white friend,” we subconsciously think that that thing that happens to us had to happen to us because we are a certain race or because our friend was a certain ace. I try not to use racial labels unnecessarily, because I hate being categorized or differentiated because of my race. I am simply a person who has had their fair share of cultural and social experiences that shape the way I perceive the world, and whether or not it is different from some people does not concern me. all I know is that I have a certain way of seeing and understanding the world that works for me, and I am always glad to share and listen to what makes my perception different from other people just in the small chance that I will pull something away from their accounts that will stay with me and force me to see myself and my understanding differently. Because I am so passionate about being labeled, I refuse to do it to other people that may result in their inner conflict.

Since we as Americans have become so engrained in the land that we have seen many generations live and die here, I do not believe that we can just give it back. But it is definitely our responsibility to help the indigenous people reestablish themselves, and we have done a lousy job of that so far. I believe that we have a responsibility to see out by helping the indigenous people reestablish themselves because ultimately this is not our land. We as Americans have to come to the understanding that we brutally fought and callously killed off populations of people to attain the land that we have. We did so under the belief that God entitled us to this land when in reality it was our own self-righteous egos that were telling us to lead whole genocidal campaigns to get this land. I mean some would argue that because we had better technology and were better able to fight the indigenous people off the land, that that gives us a reason to stay here. But just because we have the capacity to kill them all, does not mean we should have. We basically punish the indigenous people for not being smart or ingenious enough to amass the knowledge to create machines whose sole purpose it was to kill. But regardless of what happened in our nation's history, there is no way we can all pick up and leave the land to them now. Besides it being physically impossible it would be illogical. But because we had and have the upper hand over the indigenous people, instead of keeping them down, we should help them reestablish themselves and show some compassion. We could have had an ally in the indigenous people then but let us allow ourselves to establish a healthy relationship with them now.

I would have to disagree with that idea. Coming from a city like New York, I am constantly being faced with people of different races and groups from different socio-economic statuses, and I would say in my personal experience socio-economic status has more of a binding power than race does. I mean of course there are people out there that will not associate with certain groups or individuals strictly based on race, but in instances where I met let us say a white person in a predominantly black group, or vice versa, it was typically because they came from the same neighborhood or same type of background. At the heart of this issue is the question of how do people socialize and ultimately I would conclude that people are bound together when they have similar interests or have had similar past experience that would predetermine a certain aspect of their personality. Like the strings that Sam talks about in class, they would have had similar experiences with either having been well off or not being so well off that would affect how they acted or how they thought about or saw the world. For people to look at a white kid or hangs with allot of black kids or a black kid that hangs out with a lot of white kids and say that they are a poser, seriously do not have enough world experience to understand the intimate intricacies that bring people together. Again in my personal experience I have met people dozens of people who hang out with groups of mixed or different races, and I can point to one instance where a "white" kid or so I thought he was, changed my ideas about "posers." It turns out that this "white" kid was actually Egyptian and claimed to be more African than anyone. He listened to rap music and was very well attuned to the culture that the group he was associated with could identify with. He truly identified with this group of racially mixed people and it was evident in the way they would socialize. He could hold up conversations about music, girls, sports, and if you asked him he could probably recount some story about living in the hood or how he never had a lot of money. And it is not just the fact that he could hold conversations about these subjects, it was more that he understood how to communicate and say these things in certain ways that would capture his audience's, in this case a group of friends, attention and encapsulate the attitude or worldview that this group held. In my opinion, what makes a poser is someone who tries to be something they are not. What is interesting though is that even if this kid who says he is Egyptian was actually not and actually came from wealth, it would not matter, because he held the worldview and had the attitude that his counterparts had. He would still be able to communicate with them and validate them when needed. But not having that life experience that predetermines all of these intricacies would make it extremely difficult to the point that only someone who had similar life experiences would associate with people of the same realm.

Being a person of color and one who can readily admit he's experimented with one or 2 drugs, it would affect my decision to use them in the future to some degree. I would be more concerned of what part of the country I was doing them in then. Like if I found myself in the South, where the police force do not take too kindly to strangers, especially one like myself, I would probably refrain from any use. But if i was in a place a little bit more progressive like a major city, I would be less concerned. I find it interesting that drug use among black and brown people are equal too or less then white people but yet we pay the highest price. In the end it only makes sense, I mean police task forces do not target the suburbs for 2 reasons. the first is because they rate of success of capturing someone with illicit drugs would be extremely low. we see how drugs have infiltrated our streets and is even infiltrated suburban areas where drug use among young whites is high. But its easier to capture criminals in destitute, urban areas where the concentration of the drug flow is high, then it is to capture criminals in the suburbs where the drugs have exchanged hands dozens of times. The second reason is because the rate of conviction after capturing drug offenders in suburban areas would be extremely low. I do not want to make too large of an assumption here, but I would go so far as to say most people in the suburbs have family lawyers or at least have the financial capability to hire one, where as residents in urban areas might not. And if the person whose facing a minor drug offense of possession or even intent to distribute, with a proper lawyer, can walk away with a slap on the wrist. More often than not, those who cannot hire their own personal lawyer have to own up to the law to the fullest extent. Because if these two very real reasons in conjunction with fear being promoted through the media, it seems that in today's day and age its easier to paint black and brown people as the bad guys, the boogie men of our society. It makes it easier to look at a random black or brown person and associate that person with criminal acts because most of the time we see a black or brown person on the Wanted posters and on the news and take them into questioning.

First off, I want to start off by saying I think its great that Sam Richards is making it a course requirement to get involved in Haiti. Its political and social advocacy at its finest. I find it sad and a little disgusting that my generation is so lazy that often times, when asked, we cannot answer basic questions concerning what is going on around the world. Some people cannot even distinguish the finer points as to what is happening in Africa and the Middle East concerning the political upheavals. Getting involved in something like this just might be the spark that gets a few people truly interested in the global community and the crisis’ that plague it.
Second off, I think that people that Sam is having us review are great candidates for any type of financial help. They all have some sort of business plan laid out, where the only way forward is through expansion. Which is exactly what Haiti and its citizens need. They need entrepreneurs who are going to expand and provide employment opportunities so self-determination is possible. I was never one to believe in grass roots and micro financing because I thought in some way or another it would lead to an unhealthy dependency. But after seeing how just even a simple loan to buy a tag maker can change Clarene’s business, got me to believe in its benefits. And it seems that anyone of these entrepreneurs just needs something as simple as one or 2 more employees or even ideas to improve a product, to give their businesses the push it needs to really jump off. Obviously, in today’s global economy, and even in Haiti’s local economy, there is no guarantee of a business’ success but its not just profit that we would be bringing to these people but hope. The hope that one-day things will be back to normal, and all their efforts to rebuild their communities will pay off. And it is these people that are going to do it. They are not looking for handouts, which I think, is key to running a successful business. They just want a loan for things that they think will improve the likelihood of their success to support themselves and their families.

I consider President Obama to be multiracial. As he has stated himself, he is half black and half white. But ultimately, his race should not matter. The only thing I pay attention to are his policies and the way in which he carries himself both as a politician and as a human being. It is sad that in this day and age that we as a society hold race in such high regards when questioning the character of a person. When the truth is the character of a person varies from individual to individual and not from race to race. I mean obviously some people feel as though because he is multiracial that he will try to pass legislation that benefits only certain factions of society in which President Obama self identifies or affiliates with. And it is sad to know that those very people are the ones who hounded him to produce his birth certificate, as if his citizenship was falsified because he is multiracial and therefore predestined to lie. I mean lets be real, President Obama would not have made it very far even in local government if we was not a citizen. It’s disappointing to see the outright racism against our nation’s leader, when in reality we should all be supporting our him. And it goes both ways, I recall hearing interviews from black politicians who were voting for him just because he is half black. Sociologically speaking, I understand that their goal in doing so was to inspire the today’s young black males to strive for higher goals instead of adding to our country’s social ills. But when you infantilize a people, you are only ensuring their own failure. Despite opposition he persevered in fine fashion and has worked without rest to accomplish and push his agenda as a leader.

I’m typically not a religious person, so hearing that comparison made between God and the double helix was not a test of faith for me. But it did get me thinking about a recent conversation I had had concerning this idea that aliens either transplanted or helped human civilization along and the evidence is endless. All of early man’s conceptualization of their ancient gods, the vessels they traveled in, and the miracles they performed were not just fantasies, but true to life. And based on ancient man’s limited ability to understand or efficiently record what they were experiencing led them to believe that these “beings” were gods. While I am in no way a believer of any of this, it did get me to question whether it was true or not, which of course carries its own implications as to our true purpose as living human beings on Earth. I mean the discovery in modern science of the double helix DNA model is arguably one of the greatest scientific finds of the past century. And its discovery carries with it the possibility that we may someday come to fully understand the genes that make up you and I. But how is it that some random Mesopotamian, coming straight out of the Bronze Age, with not even the slightest idea of what modern science is and what it entails, was able to draw the connection between the concept of Life and this double helix? How is it that some random shaman, completely cut off from the modern world, no idea what modern medicine is, is able to listen to a God that he can only describe it to be a double helix? Its like these “gods” have been giving us the answer and pointing us to the importance of the double helix all along. Now that we are finally able to understand its purpose, are we on the cusp of finding out what makes us human or alien for that matter? Or are we just beginning off the first stepping-stone to discovering our true origins as a species? And if it does turn out that we are all kids of a group of aliens that wanted to reproduce with early man, or they are the gods that our ancient ancestors saw, what does that say about religion then and its purpose in society? If all ancient religion, which offers inspiration to modern day religion, turned out to be the product of perverse alien action and not divine intervention, does that mean that all of religion is just truly a means of coping with death? I always thought so before, and now that an intelligent race of aliens replaces the image of a white man with a long white beard, it makes just that much more sense.

Being given a label is never fun. Even when the label is positive, unless you can consistently display the behaviors of the positive label with ease and without having to consciously do it, which is often not the case, you may find yourself striving to live up to that label. Whether you succeed or not s dependent on other labels others might give you throughout life. Society as conditioned us to be aware of these labels, whether we like it or not. We label others to some degree whether we do it consciously or not; we often have preconceived notions of others based on their appearance or other displayed behaviors from past, non-personal encounters. But the point being brought to the forefront is, being in prison is tough enough. Not everyone who goes to prison has the mental capacity to handle the everyday stressed of being a prisoner, and not everyone who comes out is a hardened criminal either. But labeling them a prisoner is not going to help any of these. The whole idea of accepting the “self looking glass,” and ultimately living up to that label and ascribing to the “self-fulfilling prophecy,” really holds true in any case but especially this one. Labeling an already downtrodden, second-rate citizen as such, only further amplifies their self- defeating attitude, giving them more reason to display attitudes and behaviors that we stereotypically think of when we think of prison and its inhabitants. We may think that if it is politically correct, it is ok to label them as prisoners. But the danger that it poses to society as a whole is much greater than just not labeling them at all. Our society has unjustly equated prisoners to be synonymous with hardened degenerates who like to commit crimes, while it might seem safe for short-term conveniences, in the long run; we do greater harm and lead some prisoners to more crime if we label them. Another problem with unjust labels is that as much as we try not to, we perceive them in a certain light, which then dictates how we act around or treat them. Being it public knowledge, that being a prisoner automatically makes you a second rate citizen, labeling them can automatically influence you to treat them as such, which again can lead to complications.