Wednesday, February 23, 2011


The self-burning of Mohamed Bouazizi: He set himself aflame with a bottle of gasoline after an indigenous woman cursed and beat him hard while confiscating his electronic weighing scales and slurring his deceased father. After Bouazizi went the the government about it, and their refusal to listen, his quote stated, 'If you don't see me, I'll burn myself.’ Tis’ exactly what happened at 11:30 a.m. local time in front of a local government building.

“The Burning Monk”: Hòa thượng Thích Quảng Đức, otherwise known as “The Burning Monk”,was a Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhist monk who burned himself to death at a busy Saigon road intersection on 11 June 1963. Thích Quảng Đức was protesting against the persecution of Buddhists by South Vietnam's Ngô Đình Diệm administration.

  • They were both two completely different people who felt the need to kill themselves by burning themselves to let themselves go.
  • They were both very displeased with something and nobody would listen or protest with them.
  • Both of them threatened to do it to themselves, and did it in public.
  • Both of these situations had to do with contacting various governments and being rejected by the public.
  • They both died at 11:30 a.m. sharp.
  • Both of them killed themselves because of protests due to various things.
  • Both had thousands of people come to their funerals/ceremonies.

  • Thích Quảng Đức died in the early 60’s while Bouazizi died in 2011.
  • Thích Quảng Đức was angry because of the Buddah administrations, while Bouazizi was only angry at the woman and those who did not agree with him.
  • Thích Quảng Đức was from Vietnam, located in Asia, and Bouazizi was from Tunisia, located in Africa.
  • Thích Quảng Đức believed in Buddhism which was his main reason for his self-immolation, while Bouazizi killed himself because of something that had happened very suddenly.
  • One died in front of a public road and the other died in front of a government building.
  • They happened because of two very different scenarios.

My thoughts:
I feel like both scenarios were very important and devastating. Both of these two topics had a lot in common and some peculiar things that honestly stuck out. For the fact that both deaths happened at the exact same time is absolutely amazing to me. I feel like Bouazizi was insecure and throbbing for money just to be able to live, whereas I feel like “The Burning Monk” was okay economically to live, but had very intense feelings towards his religions. I feel like both are honestly important marks in history because of the happenings and grotesque of the self-murder. I feel like the MAIN thought in both of these peoples’ heads was suicide, a brutal thing, that comes down to not getting what you want.

Suicide Poem:
A Ballade of Suicide
G.K. Chesterton

The gallows in my garden, people say,
Is new and neat and adequately tall;
I tie the noose on in a knowing way
As one that knots his necktie for a ball;
But just as all the neighbours on the wall
Are drawing a long breath to shout "Hurray!"
The strangest whim has seized me. . . After all
I think I will not hang myself to-day.

To-morrow is the time I get my pay
My uncle's sword is hanging in the hall
I see a little cloud all pink and grey
Perhaps the rector's mother will NOT call
I fancy that I heard from Mr. Gall
That mushrooms could be cooked another way
I never read the works of Juvenal
I think I will not hang myself to-day.

The world will have another washing-day;
The decadents decay; the pedants pall;
And H.G. Wells has found that children play,
And Bernard Shaw discovered that they squall;
Rationalists are growing rational
And through thick woods one finds a stream astray,
So secret that the very sky seems small
I think I will not hang myself to-day.

My question is: Why isn’t there a law in these countries to prevent this from happening, this is obviously a big point... (self-murder), and why doesn’t anybody do anything to create some form of “help”?

Thursday, February 17, 2011

OPTION 1/Literary Analysis of WWI

1. Russia. When approaching the 20th century, Russia was currently a vast but economically backwards and communist country. Nicholas II had complete control over the governments and economics, and most of the population was poor. Russia and it’s leader tried to make various alliances with Central Europian countries and to try to become superior over Great Britain. Russia at the time was the most dangerous to all of the other countries because of it’s water and geographic advantages. For more on Russia, please click here.

2. -
When my blood flows calm as a purling river,
When my heart is asleep and my brain has sway,
It is then that I vow we must part for ever,
That I will forget you, and put you away
Out of my life, as a dream is banished
Out of the mind when the dreamer awakes;
That I know it will be when the spell has vanished,
Better for both of our sakes.

When the court of the mind is ruled by Reason,
I know it wiser for us to part;
But Love is a spy who is plotting treason,
In league with that warm, red rebel, the Heart.
They whisper to me that the King is cruel,
That his reign is wicked, his law a sin,
And every word they utter is fuel
To the flame that smoulders within.

And on nights like this, when my blood runs riot
With the fever of youth and its mad desires,
When my brain in vain bids my heart be quiet,
When my breast seems the centre of lava-fires,
Oh, then is when most I miss you,
And I swear by the stars and my soul and say
That I will have you, and hold you, and kiss you,
Though the whole world stands in the way.

And like Communists, as mad, as disloyal,
My fierce emotions roam out of their lair;
They hate King Reason for being royal –
They would fire his castle, and burn him there.
O Love! They would clasp you, and crush you and kill you,
In the insurrection of uncontrol.
Across the miles, does this wild war thrill you
That is raging in my soul?
-Ella Wheeler Wilcox

To view this poem on it’s webpage, please click here.

3. Russia has been a communist country for a long time, and it has had turning points on the people living there. Communism is where everything is ruled equally and this is exactly what this poem suggests. Piror to this war, Russia was striving to make various alliances so that Central Europian countries wouldn’t take over Russia. Communism here, comes into play by making sure that he Russian people will not turn on each other. Thou quote stated, “They would fire his castle, and burn him there.” This means that they would ALL love the power of what the king had, but would have to keep composure to continue under a monarchy, when one is really wishing for a communistic world. Thou quote stated, “Across the miles, does this wild war thrill you.” This suggests that the war between whoever you are fighting, is one against all in a world of imperialism. The entire poem justifies communism and holds various truths such as thou quote stated. The communists can relate to relate as through struggles of gaining everybody to realization. When you are in communism, you are not working for yourself, you are working for everybody. So is Russia. They are working for everybody living there to officially dominate the world, but in a very subtle way.

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

The White Man's Burden & Imperialism

1. He means, take up the experienced one’s concern with various things going on, such as war and powerful dynasties. Also, to hold one “half child half devil,” and to see the two-faces of a person, would be binding thou nature that has already set down into the world. You should trust the first “real” person you see and take on his problems. To “reap his old rewards” or to reveal his vast opinions would be taking a chance into reality and realizing the nationalism of all of the countries and the different monarchies between different leaders.

2. He justifies it by talking about how “to seek another's profit and work another's gain.” This suggests that it doesn’t matter how many powerful leaders or positions you have, in the end, you are working for everybody’s gain and/or profit. To “blame of those ye better” would suggest taking forward interest in here by blaming the leaders for what they had done before, therefore leading into nationalism and communism. Various powerful foreign countries prior the World War I, were going through the same thing that Kipling was describing in the sense of working for everybody around you and trying to find alliances that will eventually put you and your country on top. You cannot stoop down to somebody’s level, but at the same time, you cannot blame anybody for anything, because living in the situation of communism, everybody and everything is responsible for the same thing.

3. It would be appealing because it relates to every relevant thing that was happening. It had various effects on what Kipling was trying to say. The appealing is unique and grotesque because it is hidden behind a story. The real meaning is behind the fact that imperialism was quite vital to all of the participating countries at the break point of war. The appeal is quite strong because it is short and sweet and is easy to find beneath certain words.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Self-Reflection Questions Reconstruction Debate

Self-Reflection Questions
Reconstruction Debate

1.  How did I feel during planning this presentation? Why did I feel this way?
a.  I felt time managed and was happy to get every thing done on time. I stressed about memorizing things, but everything turned out ok.
2.  How did I feel prior to presenting? Why did I feel this way?
a.  I felt nervous and worried. I knew that we had a good presentation but was worried about how long it was going to be and the opposing side.
3.  How did I feel while I was presenting? Why did I feel this way?
a.  I felt confident and feel like I fulfilled everything that I could to over succeed. I knew exactly what I was doing and what I was talking about.
4.  What did I personally do well?
a.  I personally public spoke well and fed my content in a persuadable way.
5.  What did not go as desired in this presentation?
a.  The length was not as desired and there were multiple glitches with the technology.
6.  On a scale from 1-10, how well do I think I understood the content? Explain.
a.  I understood the content about a 7, because there was a lot of content and my section wasn’t about the content. I understood the Proclamation of Amnesty well, because that is the part I did.
7.  How do I think my group members perceived me? Why do I think this?
a.  I think they perceived my content as being well and strong and a very strong presenter. I think this because they have told me.
8.  How do I think the 8th graders perceived me? Why do I think this?
a.  I think they really like my presenting and how I spoke, I think this because they told me.
9.  Knowing that I can only control how I act and react, if I could do this presentation again, what would I change about my actions to make it a more ideal experience?
a.  I would make my section longer with more content.
10.                What are my strengths in groups?
a.  In debates, I am a good presenter, and, in my perspective, a good leader. I work well with others.
11.                What areas do I need improvement?
a.  I need to improve on my pre-stressing accompanies, and not being nervous to go up and talk in front of people.
12.                What is the most important thing I learned about myself? Why is this so important?
a.  I learned about my strengths in public speaking. This is important because I never used to be able to public speak well, and now I feel satisfied.
13.                Are there any other things that I need to express?
a.  I need to express and except the fact that I need to not stress SO MUCH and gain composure.