ILLINOIS - Ethics Optional!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28139523/displaymode/1176/rstry/28139155/

Do corrupt officials get elected, or do good people become corrupt in office?

That is one of the many questions stemming from the news of Rod R. Blagojevich’s resent arrest. It has long been suspected that Rod had been behaving in sketchy, or less than ethical ways, but thanks to some wire tapping, warranted I believe, they got actual tape of good old Rod trying to sell President Elect Obama’s old senate seat! That, along with threatening to cancel donation grants to local hospitals and trying to get Chicago Tribune workers fired, earned him a six a.m. wake-up call from not other than the FBI.

Illinois, the whole country actually, has a long history of corrupt elected officials. That brings us back to the question, do we just happen to let corrupt people convince us they aren’t and get themselves elected? Or does the political business have a tendency to corrupt people who began as good?

I think that power corrupts. I think we take good people, elect them, and watch them slowly, through a mixture of peer pressure and fate, fall to corruption. But not everyone becomes corrupt, and not everyone that goes in is good to begin with. I do not believe that Rod Blagojevich was good to begin with, I believe he was corrupt from the start. So I think that the saying “power corrupts” can be revised to “power can corrupt”. Power has the ability to turn any good person bad, depending on the circumstances. It is dangerously easy for people to become power hungry when tempted, and that has always been the true enemy of any good government system. So is there any way to beat it? Or is it pure human nature?

And what about the original question, do we elect corrupt officials, or do they become corrupt?

Against the Grain

Watch this video on the food crisis and how the country of Malawi faced it. Its only three minutes long, and it’s worth the watch. You have to watch an advertisement in the begining though.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#27932835

What is striking about this story is not only the booming success of what used to be one of the poorest countries in the world, but how the government of Malawi decided to go against the advice of Western countries, and try something no one had done before. By giving out 5 million dollars in fertilizer, they brought in record crops, and in an amazing domino effect, boosted their economy, their long term agriculture, their education programs, and their overall well-being. You see in one part of the clip, a small business, doing well, a tell tale sign of a strong economy. And just the fact that the farmers have enough money to buy luxury food items like fruit and vegetables, is an incredible jump from what it used to be like.

This is an amazing example for countries all over the world. With a mixture of droughts, desertification, and all around soil degeneration (the gradual diminishing of soil fertility, or how well it grows crops, to a point of uselessness), this gutsy move proved to work in more ways than just agriculturally. It brought a country out from what seemed to be a long road of poverty and turmoil, and it may be able to help many more countries like Malawi. The question really is, do we need to rethink our advice to poor countries? And when our economy is doing so horribly, can learn something from the fresh young countries of the world.

Human Rights

http://www.interaction.org/media/photo/women.html

Imagine, you’re a young girl in Afghanistan. Already sounds tough, but imagine being under threat of attack while walking to school in the morning, just because you’re a girl and you want an education.

This was the reality for four Afghani girls. On their way to school, just walking down the street, two men drove by on motorcycles, and used water guns to spray these girls with acid. Two of them where blinded, and the other girls, alone with many others around them, where badly injured. The two men got away, but are suspected members of the Taliban, and the government spokesperson called them “enemies of education.” (Article)

I consider this a human rights violation. Lately in American Studies we have been talking about political issues, and one of those was how involved we should get in other countries affairs. We are already in Afghanistan, but not entirely, we kind of have one foot in the door. This, some believe, is the reason we aren’t doing as well as we have hopped in regions like Afghanistan and Iraq. Something to bring to attention is some past wars. For example, World War I and World War II. During both wars, at the beginning, there was an overwhelming amount of young men willing to die for their country and freedom. In the homeland, meat was rationed in order to send more abroad. Metal was rationed for the war effort. Even salt was highly rationed, all so our soldiers could fight a little better, be a bit stronger, and most importantly, be a tad bit more committed. This is something that our recent wars are lacking. Not commitment from the soldiers, commitment from the citizens.

In our past war efforts, with the exception of Vietnam, the American people poured their hearts into the war effort. People rationed and donated and molded their lives in a way that would make it easier for the United States to fight a war. Today, there are no rations, and most people are completely disconnected from what is going on in our wars. Over 80% of United States Citizens over the age of 18 could NOT find Afghanistan on a blank map.

Some may argue that maybe we shouldn’t be going to war if it isn’t even justified enough to gain the support of the American people, and part of me agrees. This all comes back to those young Afghan women and the civil liberties issues that are being broken everyday in that country. I believe something needs to be done, but I also believe that if we are going to do something, we need a full commitment from everyone, or no committment at all.

Taxes

Probably the main separator between the democratic and republican parties in the United States. It's one of the most important things in our entire country. I pays for our roads, our schools, our employees, and livelihoods. This also makes it one of the most controversial.

Basically the question is, should a wealthier person pay more taxes than a poorer person?

The wealthier person has more money, and therefore would be better qualified to help out the poorer person, by paying more money themselves. It is the best way to help people on welfare who are struggling just to get food on the table. It plays back to our original idea of fairness and goodness. Take from the rich to give to the poor. Seems fair.

Or...

Everyone pays the same taxes. The ultimate idea of fair. Because a person is "lucky" enough to be successful doesn't mean they should suffer for it. These people also end up giving more money to charity than any other group of people, and therefore help just as much as they might be if they where paying more taxes. This plays back to the original idea of a pure democracy, where you don't pay more money because you just happen to have more. Seems fair.

But what is better?? This idea has had the democratic and republican parties ripping at each other's throats since the idea of parties started. They both have merit, and both seem fair, but in different ways. They both touch back to original ideas that shaped society, like the century old hero Robin Hood and the driving force of not only our country, but our whole foreign policy, democracy. And both have weak points. The more taxes seems like spreading the wealth, which some see as a mild form of communism. The equal taxes seems selfish, why wouldn't you be okay with helping people? There is no answer to this question, and basically, it will keep switching as long the political parties switch control of the white house. But just because there is no answer doesn't mean you can think of one.

Maybe there can be a compromise? Like an equal income tax. The tax is technically equal, but if you make more money you just happen to be paying more money on taxes. But neither party wants to think of a compromise because they think their way is correct. So how will this election season effect the taxes? The potential for the white house to turn blue may bring interesting results for the country. But who knows, maybe that's what we need to get us out of this hole.

The Play vs. The History Book

What is more accurate, a history book, or a play? Seems like a simple question. But then you stop and think again and realize it isn't. A history book covers concrete facts, while a play may not be factual, but is a close look into the time period. Something that makes it even harder to decide is that they both have a lot of bias. A play can be represented or written in any way the writer feels like, and history books can be changed by things like word choice or chapters. They are both, at their core, just interpretations of a time and place.

I believe that a play is more "accurate". It may not have concrete facts, with dates and times, but what a play does that a history book can't is explore the emotions of the time. Plays tend to focus on the psychological things. How people where feeling and going through and struggling with in their minds when a historical event was happening. These emotions, I believe, have a lot more importance than just a certain battle. How people are feeling at these times has bigger sway on how future events turn out, and a play gives you an amazing insight into a character, therefore into a time.

Some people believe that history books are more accurate because they provide true facts, but that wont ever give you the big picture. You could read chapters of battle descriptions and body counts but it will never make you understand the emotions of the people and how they handle the events, (which I believe is the real history) like a great play can.

Is it Really the End!?!

We have been talking a lot about the economy lately, and I think we all understand how important this really is. It is daunting when you realize that this is something that our children might be reading about in their American Studies history books. But while we are in the moment, it is really hard to get the bigger picture. My dad and I where talking about the economy and he flat out told me that this could be one of the worst times in world history. He even went as far as to say that it has the potential to be the downfall of capitalism.

I certainly hope not, and neither does he, as his career depends upon it. But it really made me realize how big this really will be. It started as just a mortgage crisis, and has turned into a world economic crisis. When we do read about downfalls of things in textbooks, for example the downfall of dynasties or the downfall of communism, it usually starts with something similar to what we have going on. Some part of their government becomes corrupt or something backfires, like our economy just did.

Something else daunting is the realization that, being a surprisingly young country, how are we sure our system actually works as well as we think it does. This about how many dynasties the Chinese went through, and the constant switch from things like imperialism, to Confucianism to Taoism. Can we be totally sure that we have it right? How much will this change the path of our country? Can we tough it out?

To end on a happier note, we have to remember what doesn't kill us makes us stronger. And we aren't dead, so we must be getting stronger.

Majority Rules

This years election brings a lot of changes to the entire government of the United States, including such places as the Supreme Court. Something that was brought to my attention recently was how the majority rule of the Supreme Court could change.
The Supreme Court is made up of nine members, and currently there are four liberal members, and four conservative members. This, therefore, means that the vote usually depends on one member (Anthony Kennedy), and one vote. Two of the other members of the supreme court are nearing retirement. Justice John Paul Stevens is 88 years old, and no member has ever served over 90.
So, during this term, Justice Stevens (a liberal) may retire. If Obama wins the white house, another liberal justice will be chosen, but if John McCain wins then a conservative justice will be picked. That will switch the majority rule to the conservatives, actually changing many regulations. There could be more gun owners, changes on the abortion debate, and changes on many other issues.
One more point thought, is that people argue that however wins will try and pick someone who will mix things up a little. They may pick someone young, or a female, because there is currently only one woman on the Supreme Court. There has also never been a Hispanic on the Supreme Court, opening that up to possibility also. So whoever wins may be looking for a young Hispanic woman.

What does this mean for our country? If McCain wins, how will the issues change? And what do you thing of a young Hispanic female as a Supreme Court leader, good idea or bad?

Slowly Falling Apart

57 people were killed from a truck bomb outside the Marriott hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan, including two Americans and a diplomat from the Czech Republic. The explosion also injured 266 people, 11 of which were foreign. Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik said the attack at the Marriott Hotel "is the biggest attack, volume-wise" in Pakistan in seven years. The driver tried to talk his way past the gates at the hotel with his truck packed with 1,300 pounds of explosives. He was a suicide bomber.

Watch the CNN news video on the attack here, and click "Suicide Blast Rocks Islamabad".

No arrests have been made with connection to the attack, but Malik says that all paths lead to the tribal regions of Pakistan. South Waziristan is where most trails wander, and is one of Pakistan's seven tribal areas where Taliban and al Qaeda militants are active. It is in tribal areas similar to Waziristan that reported sightings of Osama Bin Laden have come from, and with a big issue of this year’s election being our foreign policy and the war, Pakistan is daily becoming a more and more important country to the United States.

Pakistan is ranked as the ninth most unstable country in the world, behind countries like Somalia, which got first, Sudan, Cote d’Ivoire, and the Democratic Republic of Congo (See the list here). I guess the point of all of this information is how upsetting it is. I feel incredibly sad when I realize that this is what the world has really come to, war, strife, and a lot of hatred. I also feel confused when I realize how little I actually know about Pakistan as a country. Pakistan is an amazingly pivotal country, and it is just looming there, waiting for the US to deal with. I guess what it really comes down to is who is going to deal with Pakistan. Most trails point to Osama Bin Laden being either in Afghanistan, where we are already, or in rural Pakistan, a place that the Pakistani government has no control over. I don’t know why it is strange to me that Pakistan is so violent, and unstable. Maybe I’m just used to the peaceful side of the beautiful Islamic religion. So is there hope? Or is the world just slowly falling apart, one country at a time? I sure hope not.

Extreme Consequences

They’ve been all over the news lately. They’ve driven millions from their homes, and caused millions of dollars in damage. They’ve even stolen the spotlight from some of the most famous American politicians. And, oh yeah, that’s just this year. They are hurricanes. Hurricane season is something dreaded, yet dealt with by most of the south eastern United States. Every year dozens of storms come, with an average of 4-6 turning into hurricanes, but only 1-2 of those being a serious threat. Hurricane season officially started back on June 1st, but only recently are any hurricanes getting attention. Even so, both of those hurricanes where taken seriously, and both caused serious damage. People are starting to realize that there seems to be more serious hurricanes, more frequently. The real problem is that they’re correct. When looking at the evidence, you see that the number of category 4 and 5 hurricanes has almost doubled in the last 30 years.

“What changed in the US with Katrina, was a feeling that we have entered a period of consequences…” –Al Gore

But why is this? While many people would argue about what is causing it, many scientists now believe the culprit is none other than global warming. Global warming makes the oceans warmer, and warm water is the fuel that drives hurricanes across seas, eventually smashing them into the land that gets in their way.

Hurricanes aren’t the only thing we have to worry about either. With the earth slowly getting hotter, we can expect an array of extreme weather attacks, says organizations like edf.org, which stands for Environmental Defense Fund. Imagine massive wildfires being sparked from forests of what is essentially dry tinder. Droughts are likely, because warmer weather causes water to evaporate much faster. And all of those put together means heavier rainfall less often, which could result in flooding as disastrous as what happened to New Orleans. But even with evidence slowly mounting that these two things, extreme weather and global warming, could be linked, you rarely hear the two used together.

So, the battle rages on about whether or not global warming is the cause of these super hurricanes. Maybe it isn’t the cause. But I believe it sounds like a better idea to try and stop it this way, by fighting global warming itself, even if it is wrong, than to just wait and hope the hurricanes stop coming.

GO TEAM?

Last Friday night, I found myself amongst a throng of Highland Park High School students, cheering as their team ran in their first touchdown. But there was something wrong. I looked around to see that I was one of the few, the very few, people actually standing and cheering. I found it strange that I, a New Trier High School student, was cheering louder than majority of the students in the crowd. I joked with my HPHS friends that I had more spirit than they did and I didn't even go to their school. But then it dawned on me how hard it really is to find school spirit lately, anywhere. Highland Park isn't the only school where spirit can't be found. New Trier has "Blue and Green Fridays", where students are urged to dress in all blue and green to support our many different sports teams. I know one girl who makes an effort to wear blue and green every Friday, and every other person who does wear those colors, claims to have done it by accident. Most people would argue that there is plenty of spirit though. It is true, New Trier football games are crowded with students and fans all socializing while they watch their high school go for the win, and everyone gets extremely excited at every opportunity to pull ahead of the other team, but only at these events. How many students will follow their teams on away games? How many people wake up on Friday, remember that they should wear something blue or something green, and just pretend to have forgotten? I'm as guilty as everyone else, and it is interesting to realize that high school pride doesn't seem to be dished out by the pounds anymore. Its seems to be dripped out whenever it is convenient. What happened to make us forget we are trevians? I was standing as I screamed for Highland Park High school as they ran in another touchdown, and I heard a voice from behind me. I turned around and a boy, probably a sophomore, was sitting there. "Um, we," he said with a hint of cockiness as he waved to his surrounding friends, "would really appreciate it if you all would sit down." I couldn't believe it! Sit down? At a football game?! But then I though of myself and all the lazy students at New Trier games, and of all the students who only go to the games to stand on the sidelines and talk. This wasn't as weird as I was making it out to be, I realized. Still, I wasn't gonna let him put a damper on my wanna-be-a-spirited-Highland-Park-High-School-student parade. I looked at him and said, "Um we," making a similar gesture as his to my group of friends, "would really appreciate it if you all would stand up." Today, when so many students across the north shore are too busy to think of their local sports team, and probably a little embarrassed to show up to school as the only super crazy, colorful fan of their high school, I think it is time for all of us to break the habit of only being fans when we want to be, and to not only to be fans when the team is actually winning. To start showing how proud we are of our schools, whether it's HPHS, GBS, or NTHS, and to not be afraid to let those colors shine.