Quiz 6 Post - I'll take my stand in Dixie-Net

1. Tara McPherson’s article, “I’ll Take My Stand in Dixie-Net” is explaining how many white men in old Confederate states are trying to create a new Dixieland in cyberspace.
2. She begins the article by telling us how she first encountered these Dixie web pages. But she found that in these web pages blacks were hardly mentioned. She explains this when she says, “Cybercommunities like those of the neo-Confederates invoke specific registers of place, yet these places, like the majority of writing bout cyberspace, evade précis discussions about race or racism.” This even though blacks were a huge part of the south’s history. The creators of these websites say that they created them to preserve Southern heritage. She explains that most of the websites link to other neo-Confederate websites. One of the main facets of the heritage was the war. McPherson exclaims this when she says, “The war itself becomes the ground upon which claims to heritage are waged, though here heritage clearly functions as a universal and naturalized category which only some can lay claim to and which all “real” Southerners would die to defend. The South’s complex racial history and its relationship to the Civil War disappear as the war is rewritten in univocal terms.” She also says that numerous maps show the 11 Confederate states separated from the rest of the United States. These maps signify the way the south could have been had the war turned out differently. The “Lost Cause” is then mentioned as their remembrance of the Civil War. Even though the racism is covert, it is still clear in these websites. The heritage that they mention is undeniably white. Her point in the article is that these websites are meant to encourage a covertly racist southern society.
3. For my analysis I visited the Confederate.net website. I actually found it to be fairly disappointing. According to McPherson, this was one of the big three sites for this neo-Confederate movement. I didn’t think it had all that much Confederate stuff on the site. From reading the article, I thought it would have a bunch of discussion boards with people talking about how great life would be if there was a Confederate nation. But on the site there were only two links on the main page that had anything to do with this movement. I figured the whole site would be dealing with the Neo-Confederate movement. I was extremely surprised to find links to foreign resort vacations, adult sex, and a bunch of random sports. Another thing that surprised me about this site was that the color combinations and format of the page had nothing to do with the Confederacy. The page was purple with a random picture of a woman pouring water on herself. The confederate link at the home page linked to two Confederate on-line stores to buy Confederate merchandise. The Confederate States link just had a bunch of random Confederate pages on the internet. My final analysis of the site was that it was poor and was nothing like I expected it to be by McPherson’s description in her article.
4. I must say that the whole Neo-Confederate movement bothers me a little bit. I always wonder when I see a Confederate bumper sticker on a car, Why do you have a Confederate bumper sticker. We live in the United States of America. I honestly believe the Confederate goods should be outlawed. We live in the most wonderful country in the world, I don’t understand why people think a Confederate nation would have prospered. I hope that as I get older this movement doesn’t become an actual concern, because that would ruin this great country.

Why I hat Abercrombie and Fitch post

1. The very sense-making, the deciphering of the codes that allow one to appreciate what it is that “Abercrombie” stands for and means in our culture, can only be accomplished when we bring a variety of racialist thinking to the experience. (86)
2. The first thing that Dwight McBride did in his article was give us a brief history of the company. He said that Abercrombie and Fitch first dated back to 1892 when David Abercrombie opened his store and featured outdoor supplies. He then went into a partnership with Ezra Fitch and their company became Abercrombie and Fitch. But just a few years later Abercrombie resigned from the company because the two men wanted to take it in separate directions. By 1917 it became the largest sporting goods store in the world. Things kept getting better for Abercrombie as the company eventually became a huge business. McBride puts it, “Abercrombie’s reputation was so well established by this point that it was known as the outfitter of the rich, famous, and powerful” (86). After telling how the company came to be, he explained why he hates the company. The main reason was because, “Abercrombie has worked hard to produce a brand strongly associated with a young, white, upper-class, leisure lifestyle (86).” There are several facets of the company that point this out. One is that in their advertising; most of the models that they use are white. The appearance that the company considers the best contains features that are mainly white and not many that are black. For instance, Dreadlocks are unacceptable. It is also stereotypical to Asian Americans as one shirt that they put out read, “Two Wongs Make It White” (72). Another thing that bothered McBride about the company was their refusal to hire employees that were of the “A and F” look. In June of 2003, this was taken to court as a lawsuit was filed against Abercrombie and Fitch. But no action was taken against them. It is clear though that Abercrombie clearly hires a much larger percentage of whites than of any other ethnic group. One man whom McBride spoke with said, “The Company requires its managers to hire and continue to employ only Brand Representatives who fit within the narrow confines of the ‘Look Book’ resulting in a disproportionately white Brand Representative work-force” (78). The only non-white people who work at the stores are usually found in the stockroom, so they were not noticed. Another person with whom McBride talked to said they were looking for “All American, clean shaven, natural, football player- looking guys” (82). I think a good quote that sums up the article is, “Abercrombie, through its strategy of marketing…has convinced a U.S. public… that if we buy their label, we are really buying membership into a privileged fraternity that has eluded us all for so long, even for such vastly different reasons” (85).
3. I thought that this was an excellent and very readable article. I feel that the author gave an awesome amount of support for her arguments. It seemed as if all of the previous employees gave the same description of the racist actions that go on at Abercrombie and Fitch. With so much support from sources who actually experienced A and F first hand, she makes a rock solid argument. In my opinion, this was the best written article that we have read all year.
4. I have never seen or been to and Abercrombie and Fitch store. But I have seen many people wearing their products. I just thought it was a clothing company similar to American Eagle or Aeropostale. But clearly it is not. Therefore I’m glad that I have never seen a Abercrombie and Fitch store and after reading this article, I will never step foot in one.

Takaki Chapter 7

1. The Mexican, Spanish, and Mestizo people were already in Texas and California before the Americans discovered the west. Many of the first settlers in the western region of the United States were from Spain and Mexico. After time many people were considered to be “mestizo” a mixture of Indian or negro and Spanish. One reason that these people settled in California and Texas was because the Sapnish government promised them equipment and food. But not many Spanish settlers went to these areas and after time Mexico became independent and then controlled the land. Some of the people who owned land in the west were given it because of service for Spain or Mexico in past wars. There were really no drives or motivations for them to immigrate to the California Territory. On the other hand, the Americans went to California for one purpose, to take it away from Mexico and continue their manifest destiny.
2. The title of this chapter, “Foreigners in their Native Land” pretty much summarizes the entire chapter. The Spanish who owned the land for around seventy years or were in the blink of an eye foreigners as Americans took it over and didn’t recognize them as equal. A governor in California during the flock of Amreican’s to the west commented, “We find ourselves threatened by hordes of Yankee immigrants who have already begun to flock into our country and whose progress we cannot arrest.” Takaki also says, “Suddenly, they were “thrown among those who were strangers to their language, customs, laws and habits.” Then after the Califorina gold rush they were the minority and were forced to make many concessions through tough American laws. So in a short time span they went from wealthy rancheros to poor laborers and were treated as foreigners.
3. The Social Construction in Takaki’s seventh chapter, was how the Americans acquired and then constructed a society where the natives that had already lived in Texas and California, became a minority and had a hard time re-establishing the life that they had lived previously. They had been rich land owners before, but their land was taken by them with harsh taxes and then became poor and had to work as laborers to the “superior” Anglo Americans. The Mexican Americans were forced to work for white landowners on their farms and ranches, work on the railroads, and work in mines. When they did do the same jobs as white Americans they were paid worse wages. Takaki writes, “In Southern California…75 percent of the Mexican workers were crowded into low blue-collar occupations such as service and unskilled labor, compared to 30 percent of the Anglos. So the Socially Constructed society became the Anglo Americans at the top and the Mexican, African, Asian, and Native Americans all together at the bottom.
4. The Mexican American laborers fought for their rights in labor by continuing to go on strike wanting better pay and working conditions. Takiki writes, “Mexican members of the United Mine Workers won strike demands for a pay increase and an eight-hour day.” Eventually the Mexican and Japanese laborers joined in the cause together as they established the Japanese-Mexican Labor Association (JMLA). Labor rights were the thing that mattered the most to these people as the union declared, “Many of us have family, were born in the country, and are lawfully seeking to protect the only property that we have-our labor.” The Mexian Americans organized mutualistas, organizations that allowed the Mexicans to take a stand together. These organizations helped members who were in desperate need of additional finances. Takaki sums them up nicely when he writes, “Mutualistas reflected a dynamic Mexican-American identity-a proud attachment to the culture south of the border as sell as a fierce determination to claim their rights and dignity in “occupied Mexico.”
5. An example of race would be the mestizos. They were a mixture of Indian or Negro with Spanish. An example of ethnicity would be Mexican Americans. This ethnicity consisted of different races such as the Spanish, the mestzos, or Indians that lived in Texas and California. The difference is that an ethnicity can consist of several races. Such as the Mexican American ethnicity.

Wu quote post

I think that this is an excellent quote in Wu’s article because it is so true. Since in another article we learned that Asian Americans were a very small percentage of Americans at this time, they probably stuck out to white Americans. But when trying to make a difference it was like they weren’t even there, because whites failed to recognize their accomplishments and treated them as if they were not legitimate people. The last part of this quote ‘they have in common a loss of control.’ This means that Asian Americans had no control over how they were viewed or treated and white Americans were out of control in their brutal treatment of Asian Americans.

Takaki Chapter 10 extra credit

1. The main point of this article was the hardships that Asian Americans faced in the Pacific islands as well as the Pacific coast of the United States and how the degree of the hardships was different with both locations.
2. Takaki begins Chapter 10 by telling the reader the main reasons that the Japanese were encouraged to go to Hawaii and the United States. The main reasons were because of higher wages, hard taxation, and the policies where they emigrated to. Then Takaki describes how woman were influenced to emigrate also when he says, “Initially, most of the migrants from Japan were men, but what became striking about the Japanese immigration was its eventual inclusion of a significant number of women. These “picture brides” were products of arranged marriages. At first Takaki explains how the Asian population in Japan received lower wages and had to work in worse conditions than other ethnicities. The Asians were given the unskilled jobs while the whites took advantage of the skilled jobs. Another tactic that Takaki mentioned in this chapter was that the land owners would hire workers of many different ethnicities so they wouldn’t band together and strike for better working conditions. He states this when he wrote, “Planters explained that they preferred to divide the work force ‘about equally between two Oriental nationalities.’ Takaki explained how wrenching the work was when he said, “Harvesting the cane was dirty and exhausting work. As the workers mechanically swung their machetes, they felt the pain of blistered hands and scratched arms.” Eventually though all the ethnic groups banded together to wage a strike. The white land owners made the conditions better for the Asian immigrants. The conditions got good enough that the Asians had no desire to go back to Japan. But it was much harder for the immigrants that emigrated to the U.S. They were a huge minority as they only accounted for two percent of the population. In America the Japanese found themselves working on the railroads and starting farms. They became successful because at the time the United States was going through economic expansion, so more agriculture was needed. But life was tough. The Asians were refused citizenship. They thought their children would fare better since they were by law citizens. But this was not the case as Takaki writes, “Japanese children were often attacked by white boys throwing stones at them.” Finally just as conditions were beginning to get better the attack on Pearl Harbor set the whole process back and the Japanese were discriminated against even more.
3. I think Takaki does an excellent job of showing the differences between what the Japanese in Hawaii faced and what the Japanese in America faced. I think it’s weird that at first the Japanese in the United States were involved with agriculture. Now we always think of them making electronics. I’d never envisioned a Japanese American farmer before.
4. It’s interesting to wonder if Pearl Harbor had never happened, whether the discrimination of the Japanese would have carried on as long as it did. It’s too bad that our government and nation during World War II made things so bad on the Asian Americans, because very few of them supported Japan in that war.

Wright: The Ethics of JIm Crow extra credit

The point of this autobiography is clearly to show that the Jim Crow laws clearly hindered African Americans in the south after the Civil War. I think a sentence from his writing that could serve as a thesis is “There were many times when I had to exercise a great deal of ingenuity to keep out of trouble.”
2. The entire article summarized some events that a young black man had to go through in his early life that had lasting impressions on him for the rest of his life. He starts by telling how he got injured by a broken glass bottle during a fight with white boys and how instead of feeling sorry for him his mom beat him instead so he would learn his lesson. Then he told the story about his first factory job and how he was threatened for trying to learn to do better from the white workers. After that he told the story of how he tried to hitch a ride with some white men and was smacked in the face by a beer bottle and left in the middle of the road. The next story was about how a policeman bashed him against the curb on purpose while he was on his bicycle. Then he told of a few bad experiences that he experienced or witnessed while being a hall-boy at a hotel. Another experience he told about was seeing a black woman beaten and then hearing that it was lucky nothing worse was done to her. The last episode he wrote about was how over a long time he learned some tricks that helped him avoid physical harm or verbal abuse. While on an elevator, he couldn’t take his hat off so a white man did for him. But he knew from experience it was good not to say thank you so he pretended to be struggling with the bags that he was carrying.
3. I thought that Wright did a wonderful job in his autobiography of explaining how you had to live as a black person in the Deep South. Only excerpts were taken from his book. Unfortunately, none of them contained any dates as to when these things occurred. I am curious as to whether they were close to the Civil Rights Movement or if they were closer to the end of the Civil War. It was truly terrible; the things that black people had to go through in this time period. The thing that amazes me is how the policeman acted violently against blacks just as other white people did. I think Wright did a good job showing the wide assortment of things that black people had to go through. It was just a few things that the blacks had to be careful about. They had to be smart about every single decision that they made. If they weren’t, they would have to pay terrible consequences.
4. Earlier we read about how bad life was for blacks on the southern plantations before the Civil War. From these excerpts from Wright’s autobiography, I can see that even with freedom their lives really didn’t become much better. It is sad to read about all the years where blacks were treated so poorly. Many had to live their whole lives under these terrible circumstances.

Comic book post

1. I think the thesis this comic book cover was trying to accomplish was that the Americans had a far better military than the Japanese did and that Americas was winning the war.
2. This cover is trying to show that America was winning the war in the Pacific against the Japanese. The American soldier is much stronger than any of the Japanese soldiers. American soldiers are rushing across the bridge as if they are winning the battle and about to annihilate the Japanese army. Also an American plane shot down a Japanese plane. The battle was taking place on an island in the Pacific with all of the trees, so it must have been a battle later in the war. So clearly the artist is saying that the American army is far better than the Japanese army and that the American’s will win the war easily.
3. As is mostly the case with the media during wars, I don’t think the impression that this cover was making was the correct one. The drawer is pretty much saying that the American army was stronger and much better than the Japanese army. I learned in my history classes that this was not the case. In no way did the American army dominate the Pacific side of World War II. In fact I think the whole war was only slightly won by the American army. If the United States would not have been blessed to invent the atomic bomb, the war would have took much longer to finish off. There were a ton of American casualties in the Pacific Theater during World War II and if the Atomic bomb had not been used, they probably would have been doubled by the time the U.S. army would have reached Japan. So the artist’s representation of total American dominance in the war I feel was blatantly off.
Another part of the cover that I would like to analyze, is the misinterpretation of the actual looks of the Japanese soldiers. Once again here, the artist is blatantly off. He makes the Japanese soldiers look like monkeys who are trying to eat the American soldiers. They all have their mouths wide open like they may try to bite the American solder. I think the reason their mouths are open is because they are getting hit by bullets, but to me they look like they may try to bite the American before their deaths. The also look like monkey as their mouths bulge out of their face. The author is trying to make them look like blood thirsty savages. Now I know combat can be extremely ferocious, but I think the artist just paints the wrong picture here.
4. Clearly this time in our nation was a time of extreme hate toward people of Asian nationality and this is truly shown in this cover. I guess I was just stunned at how the author made the Japanese solders look like savage monkeys. The drawer made the Japanese soldiers look much meaner than they actually looked. The artists hate against Asian culture clearly comes out in this comic. But since the war was such a terrible time for our nation, I guess this cover looked pretty much how I expected it too look. Clearly an American artist isn’t going to make the Japanese army look superior and nice.