Thursday, October 29, 2009

Morales is abandoning traditional ways of running the government and doing things to directly help his people. His unconventional way of government has labled him anti-american. The Only reason why they might call him anti-American is because he no longer wants to cooperate with the amirican system that made his country poor.The term populist,used to also describe morales, is because he is listening to the people and they have the same intrests.However he has also been called a demagogue for using people emotions to gain political power.I feel that if the government hadent destroyed their economy the people would have lived decent lives and would not have needed change.Many countries try to build a relationship with the U.S. in hopes that it would help them prosper but Morales has seen that that idea dosent benifit anyone except the U.S. I do not think that the fears of morales being in power are jusified because all the fears are based on the fact that he was a political activist. Morales did not have a previous position in the government and that worried other officials, but because of the demand of his people he won his place in office. I suppose I could understand the initial reaction of having a leader that openly spoke out against the government. Just because foregin countries are no longer abiding by the system that benifits the U.S. does not make it a bad plan.The people are finally breaking away and enriching their life as opposed to working to enrich America's life."Opon taking office Morlaes cut his own presidential salery by more then half,condeming corruption and the pillaging of the country" (259).That action by morales shows he truly is acting on the intrest of his country.

Thursday, October 22, 2009


What is my thesis?
-America is trying to gain aknowledgement,but doing so poorly, by making McDonalds their representative. And with the long list of injustices America has inforced to is only deterioting it's image.

If I hadn't written this, would I have convinced myself of this thesis? What would I be skeptical about?
-I suppose so...I pretty much say it point blank but i would need more evidence to convince the reader. And i would be skeptical of my quote,since i dident cite them...

Does my evidence support my thesis?
-I suppose since i dident cite my quotes it would be hard to call it "evidence". So, no my evidence does not support my thesis.


For centuries, countries have used wars to demonstrate their strength and ability. We hve now realized that we can no longer afford to have enemies.Countries decided that it's easier to provide a service that they can profit from by attracting a global audience. By giving back to the people,countries can instead shift their image of an imperial power to that of a provider.America is known for it's fast food cahin,McDonalds. McDonalds has represented America for years. With over fifteen thousand restaurants in the U.S. alone and more than one hundred and seventeen overseas, some believe that it represents "a junk culture" and "the banilty of capitalism". I believe that McDonalds represents the failure of America as a provider.It has failed to provide appropiate food yet continues to spread. The power of a franchise is more mental.It aims to give you a preception of the supplier.
^^^old one^^^

**new one**
For centeries, America has constantly been compeating with other countries in order to demonstrateits strength and ability. It has been able to maintain on top,partly due to the fact that it realized it could no longer afford to have enemies. With that, America decided its easier to provide a service it can profit from by attacting a global audience.By doing this America's image can be shifted from an Imperial power to that of a provider. One service that could be appriacated globally is food. America realized it can buy it's image by selling something thats supposed to "represent" them. With this idea in place America became the bithplace of the franchise, McDonald's.With over Fifteen thousands restaurants in the U.S. alone and over one hundred and seventeen overseas, McDonald's Became known as a staple of "American" food. But what happens when your product is not up to par,and thus, shows your failure? America shamefully allows McDonalds to ruin its image,all for profits. This shows other countries that we don't care about the service we give them as long as we can profit from it.That creates a new image for us, and with that,new tension between countries.

The mental power influences peoples lives.brainwashing??

Colbert Video

The ideological part of Kliens argument is that Governments use disasters in order to make people fearful. She claims that when people are shocked they go into a childlike state and people just want to get out of the situation so they allow the government to do that with no questions asked,feeling as though they will be safer.Klein wants the government to do more by taking the money that has been privatized and putting it back into the hands of the government.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Life and Debt

- Do you think Life and Debt shows an example of colonialism? Why or why not? How does it compare to other forms of colonialism we've talked about in the cluster?- Who has the power in the film? How do they hang on to it? What do you think the Jamaicans (either the government or the people) could do to challenge it?- What connections do you see betwen this film and other cluster texts? Be specific.

I think that life and debt do show some examples of colonialism.Britain felt as though Jamaica had an obligation to them since they had a past as a british colony.It compares to other forms of colonialism because they have strong ties to eachother,economicly and politicaly.The people who had power in the film were the IMF.They control the legal rights to all aspects of currency.The Jamaicans had to comply with them because Britian had an obligation to them,and they had an obligation to Britian.The connection that i see in all the texts is the government is just trying to get money.