Participation Journal for 9-30-13

How do I use language?  Do I take care to use strong, emotionally provocative words in meaningful ways?

      I try not to use profanity or other offensive words while I am around others and I try to refrain from saying words that could be taken out of context. For instance, I would not talk about something that would make me appear ignorant or unaware of others preferences on such topics as gay marriage or abortions. In other words, I try not to be openly opinionated. I only use strong words when I feel that it fits the situation. When talking about an issue that is important to me I will often try to use words that show how passionate I feel about the subject.

Notice how others use words (violent language) and phrases (collateral damage, conservative, fundamentalist).  Do these words help or hinder a discussion?When do these phrases appear?

             I believe that these words conceal the true intentions of those using them. They are deceiving to those who do not know what they actually mean and disguise the purpose of the action that is taking place.These phrases often appear as euphemisms in serious situations that might involve death or hopelessness. 

What is my experience with prejudice?  How are my actions influenced by my own history? 


                When I was younger I attended a predominantly African American school and was often ridiculed for not necessarily blending in with the crowd. I was constantly picked on for having pale skin while having a hispanic last name. Most of my classmates told me that my skin was too white to be considered hispanic. This type of harassment made me feel segregated from my friends who were darker than I was and left me with a sense of shame. I thought that I wasn't good enough to be included in the hispanic group but not white enough to be friends with that group of people as well. 

                I think that this experience helped me appreciate the beauty of my own skin once I was taken out of that situation. After I met a new group of friends in high school I learned that my skin color was a gift and not a burden. I always thought that my skin made me different in a negative way but I was relieved to hear that others who were darker than me actually wished that their skin was as light as mine. This situation taught me that everyone has insecurities and that there is no such thing as the perfect skin color because everyone is special in their own way.

Do my actions/words reflect my values today?  Or am I relying on certain cultural buzz words?

             The words I use in my everyday language reflect my personality and beliefs. Sometimes I do fall into the habit of using words that I hear on television such as popular slang but overall I think that my word choice is unique.

How do my words/actions contribute or challenge mainstream cultural attitudes?


              As a whole, I think my generation uses diction as a way to connect and bond over certain issues. I know that I personally use words that I hear others use in my own conversations. It is very hard for someone to create their own words when they are constantly hearing the same type of phrases from close ones. 

The 8 Stages of Genocide Notes

The 8 Stages of Genocide

According to Gregorry H. Stanton, President of Genocide Watch, there are 8 stages of genocide that vary by degree.

All of these stages were discussed in both readings we have done so far in "FTKMF' and Maus but I think more was talked about in Maus.

Vladek goes through each of these stages as the comic continues. For instance, in the beginning of the comic Jews were classified by their characters such as physical traits and the jobs they held. Towards the middle of the comic there is a shift from simply classifying Jews to polarizing human groups by taking away their property and separating them into factions.

When they are sent to the death camps initially half of those taken are exterminated. These same type of events also take place in Loung's novel.

Both Vladek and Loung go through a sort of denial phase once they are taken out of the situation. Loung tries not to think about the situation at all and separates herself from the family while Vladek gets angry with Anja every time she tries to talk to Art about the Holocaust.


The 8 Stages of Genocide are:
1. Classification
2. Symbolization
3. Dehumanization
4. Organization
5. Polarization
6. Preparation
7. Extermination
8. Denial

Participation Journal 2

1. In relation to other events that have occurred around the world, the United States has generally avoided interfering with other nations when genocide is the problem. Although, the United States has made minor attempts to intervene with counties facing genocide, they have not really made any breakthroughs.

2. Lemkin along with his successors made it possible for other countries to intervene through the law that has made due to the ideas set forth in his book.

3. State Sovereignty  all type of activity directed towards the welfare of people such as building schools and constructing roads. Genocide has typically been disguised as efforts for state sovereignty by pushing an agenda that says that they are wiping other groups of people for the welfare of the true race, to purify the nation.

4. The Holocaust spread awareness of genocide through a mass scale. It brought attention to the practices of hate crimes that were being committed in other countries as well as create a general understanding of what defines genocide. The Holocaust made the world aware that events such as this were occurring and that there were people who couldn’t speak out against their rulers because of the barriers of society.

5. Most victims didn't speak out after the war until it was over. They were fearful for their lives.

6. There were disagreements about the text of the law. U.S. senators feared that the language would be used to target Americans. 

Notes on War & Genocide Chapters 2-4

Intentionalists are people who emphasize Hitler’s intentions or say that the Holocaust was a result of long-term planning.

Functionalists- believe Holocaust was a function of other developments that evolved over time, downplay Hitler’s role.

Both viewpoints are ridiculed.

Hitler was a mediocre student, failed to get accepted into art school.

Pan-Germanism- belief that Germans should be unified in one state.

Hitler blamed Jews for WWI. He also blamed Communists.

Hitler might have had a secret love affair with his niece.

Aryans-group of people in ancient India.

Furer Principle- commitment to uncontested leadership.

There was only 1 woman who was close to Hitler’s inner circle. Her name was Gerttnid Scholtz-Klunk, she saw her greatest contribution as motherhood.

Not much fighting was done inside Germany, so most of the economy was still intact. Although, they suffered form inflation or hyperinflation.

Stock market crash of 1929 affected Germany.

In 1933, Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany.

After Hitler lost the election for the position he wanted he almost committed suicide.

“Third Reich” or third empire began.

2 phases of WWII
Nazi revolution

German parliament building was burned down, Hitler said that the Communists burned it. Many didn’t believe him.

Hitler saw homosexuals are an evil because they stopped the reproduction of the Aryan race. Mostly saw homosexual men as threats not particularly women though since they did not exercise power. He felt that they could be forced to reproduce.

Nazi ideology was based on blood so even people who converted religion were still considered Jews.

Hitler ordered sterilization of certain groups of people. In March 1933, first concentration camp opened.

Propaganda was made to convince people to accept his ideas,

July 1933, concordat was made with Catholic church and Germany.

January 1934, non aggression pact with Poland was signed.

Disease was prominent in death camps.

Law for Protection of German Blood and Honor- forbade marriage or sexual relations between Jews and “Aryan” Germans.

Law was also against Germans.

Hitler had a four-year plan to prepare the German economy and military for war.

Most of the German public was not eager for war. Although, Hitler began training people for war.

26,000 thousand Jewish men and women were sent to concentration camps. Synagogues were burned down. Most people fled to France, Poland and the Netherlands.

Rassenschande- crimes against the blood.

Pact of Steel was made with Italy and German in May 1939.

Hilter-Stalin Pact was crated in Aug 1939.

Goal was racial purification.

Germans tested killing practices on handicapped children. They did this secretly from the public.

Maus 2 Notes

Synopsis of Chapters

The comic takes on a different tone once Vladek dies. Art feels extremely guilty and remorseful about the way he treated his father.

A priest tells Vladek that he will survive the death cam because the numbers imprinted on his arms mark important dates in Hebrew dates.

As they continue talking about his experience, Vladek's age is taking a toll on him. Art is getting frustrated about his father's attitude toward saving money and needy nature. After Mala laves Vladek, Art and his wife try to help him get his paperwork in order.

The last scene where Vladek is alive shows him and Art sneaking into a resort so Vladek can play bingo for free.

Once they are Auschwitz, Vladek trues to find ways to barter with the guards and ends up being a tutor for a guard who wants to learn English. This opportunity helps him attain food and get a new fitting uniform for his friend.

Vladek is able to get a job as a shoe maker, a skill he was very good at when he worked with his cousin in the ghetto.

Vladek tries to save enough of his rations in exchange for Anja's transfer to another work camp. One day he finds out that his rations have been stolen so he starts to save all over again. Eventually, he has enough to barter.

When Vladek is transferred to a camp in Dachau, he says that it was more miserable than his previous camp.

Towards the end of the book, Vladek is freed from the war and must find a way to get back to Anja. The last chapter ends with the two finding each other and Vladek telling Art that he is tried of telling stories.

Final Thoughts:

I enjoyed the ending to Maus 2, I feel that Art was able to capture his father's authentic nature and his vision through this comic.

Art's attempt to understand his father was sincere and heartbreaking. By writing this book, Art is able to put together he voices of the unheard with the visions of their trauma. Overall, I feel attached to the characters and think that it is an excellent comic for anyone to read.

"A Problem From Hell" Notes Chapters 1-5

Powers opens up with various anecdotes about people who have been affected by war. She talks about her experience as a correspondent for The Post in a country where genocide is prevalent.

The preface recounts one story of a young girl who was murdered at a playground. She does into detail about the girl's day leading up to when the incident happened.

Powers talks about the definition of genocide. She credits the first use of the word to Raphael Lemkin in 1944.

In Chapter 3 it is discussed how German acts of murder were seen as rumors at first.

At first, many people didn't believe the reports of Jewish hate crimes and stories about the death camps.

Lemkin was inspired by Winston Churchill's radio speech to write his book. In his book he mentions the first use of the word "genocide."

People were horrified by the word while others believed the word didn't have any power.

Chapter 4:

Lemkin didn't want understand why genocide wasn't against the law.

Most victims didn't speak out after the war until it was over. They were fearful for their lives.

Only one of Lemkin's siblings survived the war. When he found out that his parents and other siblings were killed he was distraught about it.

On December 11, 1946, the word "genocide" was finally mandated as an illegal act of killing against entire human groups.

In 1948, the definition of genocide was settled. It was also determined what classified genocide and how it could be persecuted.

It was the first time the UN has adopted a human rights treaty.

It took 40 years to ratify and 50 years for anyone to be convicted.

Notes from class:

America has international power. U.S. is the wold power/influences other nations, leadership role. U.S, has military and economic power.

Better to have discussion and be aware.

Have Holocaust education, commitment to Holocaust awareness.

Discussion Questions: "First They Killed My Father"

1. One interesting value that the Khmer Rouge taught was that everyone has equal and no one deserved to have more than another. This idea disabled many from having adequate amounts of food and in most cases, lead to the starvation of those held as prisoners. Those who were in power in this regime did not know who to run a government. They also resorted to killing others, which shun them from their own public. The Khmer Rouge did not have enough food supply to feed their village. They also didn’t have as much power as the regime that took over their territories.

2. Having a child as a narrator for this story made it easier to understand. The type of imagery that she uses is more recognizable because of the descriptive words that she uses. Her transformation throughout the novel is very drastic. She changes from an innocent child into a young adult that resents everyone involved in the war. Loung eventually turns into an aggressive person from having to constantly defend herself from others. As she tries to hide her true feelings and weakness, she disguises it as anger and spite towards others.

3. Knowing that Loung’s father was expected to die before reading the novel did not take away from the shock factor of his death. It was still nerve wrecking to read how he was taken away from her family. The rumors that her father might still be alive after his execution serves to show how Loung holds onto hope that he could be living a new life somewhere as a free man. 

4.  I would not necessarily describe Loung as feminist because she does not have strong feminist views towards the movement besides obvious observations concerning gender roles in the war. Since she was female, Loung was spared from hard manual labor and was able to stay with her mother.

5. Based on Loung’s experience in the war, it is not surprising that she would want a second chance in America. Since Loung was the youngest living sibling it makes sense that she would be the likely candidate of joining her brother overseas. The difference between Loung and Chou is based on their upbringing in the war. Chou’s path made her into a traditional woman in Cambodian culture while Loung seems to be very americanized when they are reunited in the last chapter. I sympathize with Loung’s character because the most sought choice after dealing with a traumatic experience is to remove yourself far away from the situation but with Loung it is harder to move on because her only living sister was left behind. Loung and Chou experienced everything together and in the end they are still separated.

6. A survival is someone who is willing to take any type of punishment, harassment, or in some cases, torture in order to be alive. Sacrifice is also another major characteristic that often describes a survivor. Most people must sacrifice something if they want to live another day. Survivors typically believer or have hope that they will make it out alive and their lives will be better once the war is over. With this vision in mind, survivors will endure any type of treatment to help themselves or others. They also must have a certain degree of apathy or be desensitized to the war. If they grow attached to someone it will break them down mentally. Therefore, they have to distance themselves from others.

Chou has able to survive due to her quiet and reserved nature. She did not get into any altercations with other prisoners nor did she start any conflicts. Chou is the total opposite of her sister Loung. Unlike Loung, Chou does not develop an aggressive nature toward others. Chou also has many helpful skills such as cooking and taking direction which helps her survive the war.

7.  When it comes to war it is hard to distinguish the line between what may or may not be ethical. In this case, when someone is face to face with death they will more than likely attack their assailant, which might be ethical. However, someone who is not involved in the situation might consider the attack unethical. In other worlds, it is hard to take oneself out of the situation because everyone acts differently when they are in danger, some people are more submissive than others. Any situation in war can be ethical or ethical depending on which side you are on.

I think the use of acid in war should be banned. If the victim is able to survive the attack they will never be able to fully recover. The use of this weapon also poses a danger to the environment and any other persons involved.