Europeanisation

In De Crevecouer's 'Letters from an American Farmer' he tries to identify what it means to be an American and the cultural identity that these Native Indians have. When describing the natives mannerisms he makes them out to be respectable human beings, what is interesting is the way he portrays the European invaders.

'The manners of the Indian natives are respectable, compared with this European medley. Their wives and children live in sloth and inactivity; and having no proper pursuits, you may judge what education the latter receive. Their tender minds have nothing else to contemplate but the example of their parents; like them they grow up a mongrel breed, half civilized, half savage, except nature stamps on them some constitutional propensities'

De Crevecouer tells of how the Europeans lifestyles are very placid, these families have migrated to America for the promise of its riches in land and promise for development and yet De Crevecouer witnesses a place in which Europeans have taken and almost regressed in. He describes the children of these people to be 'half civilized, half savage' implying that they have inherited characteristics from both the Native Indians and the European conglomerate, however he does not specify from which group they are from.

I chose this quote specifically because it provides an interesting view for modern society's view on Americanisation. The dominant ideology in today's media is that the rest of the world has conformed to an American lifestyle, this is seen through the fast food life style, the American clothing, American T.V and film as well as other American produce all over the world. This coincides with the view that most Americans are sloth like, lazy and quite ignorant towards education. What is interesting though how De Crevecouer uses these words in describing the Europeans who've moved to America, therefore today's use of the term Americanisation should be used carefully because this idea originates from the original Europeans to move to America.

De Crevecouer in my opinion portays America as being a huge melting pot of all different cultures and ethnic groups. However in his time different ethnic groups were seen as lower in the community hierarchy.


"The next wish of this traveller will be to know whence came all these people? They are mixture of English, Scotch, Irish, French, Dutch, Germans, and Swedes. From this promiscuous breed, that race now called Americans have arisen."


I have chosen to look at Barack Obama as he is mixed race. Obama Obama is the son of a white woman from Kansas and a Kenyan man. This website explains that America wants to be portrayed as a multi-cultural country and every person has the same rights. This links into the "American Dream" and frontierism - a hard working ethos and a self-sufficient population because the country was new you could make a whole new life and be who you want to be. De Crevecouer describes the land of having endeless posibilities and that there are no territorial restraints. He gives this image that every ethnic group lives in harmony and peace.


In my opinion De Crevecouer and Barack Obama are emphasizing the fact that it does not matter where your ancestors are from or the colour of your skin you still have the same chance as everyone else. The land is new and you can aspire to be whatever you want. This is going back to the "American Dream". In my opinion many American's still have this belief and will continue to do so.

America and Tiffany & Co.

Overall De Crevecouer portrays America as ‘modern, peaceful and benign’. He sees the USA as a new land in which possibilities are endless due to the absence of many restraints, especially of the religious, territorial and religious type. The fact that we follow the life of a farmer in the letters metaphorically epitomizes the general American ethos: that they are a nation of grafters that make things happen for themselves; a self-sufficient population in which each person works hard to provide for their own.
The states of America are also described as ‘the embryos of all the arts, sciences, and ingenuity, which flourish in Europe’. It is almost depicted as Europe’s ‘brain-child’, a place that so called ‘enlightened Englishmen’ went to set up a new, better land – a version that was superior to Europe. It is in America where inventions are created all in novel. Europe is also described as having ‘so many useless plants’ can also be seen both in a literal and metaphorical sense: having useless plants due to the supposedly infertile soil, and also as Europe being a very ornate place, but not so practical. The US, still in the present day, likes to pride their nation on being very practical and hands-on. Furthermore Europe may not be seen as a place that allows ‘plants’ to flourish, and with ‘no aristocratical families’ in the USA everyone is supposedly equal, born with equal opportunities (more so than any other country), and has just as much of a chance to succeed it they are prepared to be a grafter and sow their own seeds.
I used the ‘www. tiffany.com’ website, (also known as Tiffany & Co.) to represent the USA. As they are one of the biggest jewellery establishments in America and well known for their customised jewellery and shiny diamonds, I feel that this shows how the ‘self-sufficient farmer’ in a new land has grown and expanded since then, to become an internationally recognised multi-million dollar empire. The idea and connotation of diamonds also is one of wealth and success which concurs with De Crevecouer's idea of America. Diamonds are instantly recognised, especially those of 'Tiffany & Co., and so is the portrayed 'American Dream' style way of life of America.

I have decided to look at the United Nations Association of the Unites States of America (UNA-USA) as my webpage linking to Crèvecœur. It is at the heart of the Unites States’ involvement within the United Nations and gives an insight into what the Americans are doing in changing the world.

It was founded in 1943, before the United Nations was formed in 1945. The United Nations was created as a result of the League of Nations Association which was formed by a group of citizens in the States who wanted to join the countries together after the Second World War.

I feel that the UNA-USA links closely to Crèvecœur’s work, in particular in his chapter “What is an American?”

Here individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men, those labours and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world. Americans are the western pilgrims, who are carrying along with them that great mass of arts, science, vigour, and industry.

He had belief that every American can change the world and be inspired to help others. This is the thought that the few citizens must have had before creating the League of Nations Association, and then the United Nations, which is now the most important international organisation.

Crèvecœur is certain that the new Americans settling there have the resources, imagination and ability to change the world in any way they see is best; luckily they chose to change it for the better. And it’s true, the UNA-USA is proof of it, that Americans did cause great changes in the world and will carry on doing so.

http://www.unausa.org/Page.aspx?pid=220

De Crevecouer and Schwarzenegger take on America!

De Crevecouer book "Letters From An American Farmer" not only told Europeans of the great land that was America, it told them it was this grand, new, and ultimately free land that they could settle in. Seeing as the book, would of been mainly read in Europe, De Crevecouer used it in a way to challenge the way the Europeans would of thought about America. He compared this new unconquered land to conquered Europe. He once states in the letters, that in Europe everywhere you look there are fences and hedges, yet if you are in America, there are no fences or hedges, no boundaries at all. This suggest that this entire land is unclaimed and ready for the settles to make something off the land.

I chose to focus on the 5th letter titled "Education and Employment in Nantucket" I read this, and felt that it was very important to the book, and to the description of America. In the quote "After many trials, and several miscarriages, they succeeded; thus they proceeded, step by step; the profits of one successful enterprize..." from this quote, De Crevecouer is talking about the whalers, that started fishing cod, but then started whaling, which in turn made them more successful, which expanded their business. He seems to be describing that, in America if you work hard, you will succeed! This in comparison to Europe, where if you work hard, it will most probably be for nothing, as there is always a richer person with more power, lording over you.

With this, I felt it was relevant with Arnold Schwarzenegger, seeing as he came from Austria, he moved to America to pursue a career. Through his bodybuilding, he got into acting, and through a long career in Hollywood, Schwarzeneggar was elected in 2003 to become the California Governor (or as he is called the Governator). I feel that what De Crevecouer was describing in his letters, was the beginning of the American Dream. You work hard in America, you will get the rewards you deserve. You will make it. And Arnold Schwarzenegger is a prime example of the American Dream. He worked hard from the beginning and got to where he deserved. This reflects De Crevecouer's ideals he wrote about in his letters. America is very different to Europe. America is this place where you have the freedom to make something of yourself. To create a sustainable farm, to create a business fishing cod to expanding that into whaling. America is a land of hard work and freedom.


Source.

Ethnic Makeovers

From the most beautiful Hollywood star to the most downloaded woman on the Internet, 'ethnic makeovers' have always been worryingly prevalent. Like the Dutch, German, Spanish, Scott people that came to America when it was first born, many still feel that in order to properly assimilate they must get rid of their former heritage and work towards achieving an ideal image of what it means to be American.

Rita Hayworth

Thinking of Rita Hayworth, you probably think of a cigarette dangling invitingly from her lips, of a beautiful dress, of Gilda, of dancing, of lasting beauty. You probably don't think of Margarita Carmen Cansino, or of her ever looking like this



This is Rita Hayworth before she was signed to Columbia Pictures. Somewhere in between the time this photo was taken and her first films in the late 30's, she had electrolysis to move back her hairline, her skin lightened and her hair dyed, and thus Rita Hayworth, sex Goddess, was born. She had a long and illustrious career, danced with Fred Astaire, sang with Frank Sinatra, and ended up being one of the most iconic women in the 'Golden Age' of Hollywood, yet the Hayworth we remember couldn't be more different from the girl she once was. However, in the context of history, one could understand why her ethnicity might have been a problem, especially to a very conservative audience, but the idea of changing your physical appearance in order to fit in to the norm seems a uniquely American problem. This is also seen in Crèvecœur's Letters from an American Farmer, where he discusses what it meant in the early days of America's inception to identify oneself as American "He is an American, who, leaving behind him all his antient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the mode of life he has embraced..." This passage indicates even then that previous life, beliefs or attitudes no longer matter when you are seen as American, something which to the modern reader seems very unusual and somewhat optimistic; the idea that they really are all all the same regardless of background because of their status as Americans seems very idealised, yet when looking at the before and after pictures of Rita Hayworth above, you start to wonder how true that statement may be, and whether its more superficial than that.

Mary Rowlandson's Kidnap

Taken from Google books: Classic American Autobiographies by William L. Andrews
Name: Mary Rowlandson

In 1675 Mary Rowlandson was kidnapped by Native Americans due to their detestation of the white Europeans immigrating to the United States. She was kept hostage throughout the war in Massachusetts, Rhode Island.

“On February 10, 1676, Mary Rowlandson and her children were taken captive by a band of Narragansetts” This, for me, displayed the discontent that was felt by the Indian Native tribes of Rhode Island towards the newcomers. The fact that they took the woman and her children shows the extent of their distress as taking women and children instead of men would have had a greater impact on the rest of the White settlers, thus making more of an impact.

"Mary Rowlandson was born in Somerset, England" - The origin of the first settlers displays England's imperialistic motives during this time, and how they exercised these to the extent of taking over other countries that were already populated.

Furthermore the fact that "A year after her [Mary Rowlandson] husband's death in 1677 Rowlandson married a leader of the Connecticut colony" reveals, to me, the desperation of the prisoner to survive in her new setting (in which she was the minority) so had to marry into the tribe in order to survive, as well as the ruthlessness of the inhabiting Indian tribe.





Source: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5IamUilytiwC&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=william+andrews+1676&source=bl&ots=_M8RZMBNtD&sig=HkvuRg59_j_VoUPW-2seymHVd4o&hl=en&ei=Z_G9TKHZI8u74QaJ6tmRAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=william%20andrews%201676&f=false

"The Proceedings of the English Colony of Virginia," Travels and Works of Captain John Smith

Captain John Smith describes the founding of James Town 1607.

In this short passage Captain John Smith desribes the horrible conditions him and his men endured for some time. He explains that the men and himself had to live off a daily portion of buscuit. There only drink was water. As well as having biscuits they were rationed half a pint of wheat and as much barley with bolied water as they wanted. However Smith say that these food supplies had been in the ship's hold for some 26 weeks and contained more worms than grain. He goes on to desribe there sleeping arangements which he describes as "castles in the air". (In the trees). He also describes the continual labour in the scorching heat had weakened the men considerably. In the first few months 50 were buried.

The account later goes on to say that the "Savages" brought fruit and many provisions. At this time he believed that God had told them to do this and thats why they survived. Smith bagan to build and thatch houses always taking the heaviest load. However the generosity of the Native American's begin to decrease. Himself and a company of 6 or 7 men went down the river to Kecoughtan and traded commodities for a boat full of corn. This became a regular occurance.

I found this short passage very interesting because he does not speak of the Native people's being less important than him. I realise that he does call them "savages" but I think this is a defence machanism as he realised that they had skills which he didn't possess to survive comfortably in this new found world. It is also interesting to read of how their living conditions were very inhumane. It is no wonder that the first settlers had a very low life expectancy as they did not have a balanced diet and were doing very hard manual labour. It is fairly obvious that many of the men died from exhaustion and malutrition. Aslo as it was a new land they were unaware that the land was boggy and marshy and unsuitable to grow crops or have a farm. It also took the colonie a lot longer than anticipated and missed the perfect time slot for plating and harvesting crops.

John Smith vs. The Starving Times.

I've chosen to look at John Smith's account on the Starving Times. It starts off in 1609, and details the early Jamestown settlement. The account is written from many different viewpoints inter cut with John Smith's own opinions and views. The beginning of the account details captains Martin and West "having lost their boats and near half their men among the Savages" This gives quite a negative view of the Native Americans, attacking settlers and killing half of a a captain's crew and destroying their boat.

It goes onto say that Captain Sicklemore with thirty people, were all slain apart from one, which the Native American princess Pocahontas saved. It details the great starvation that the settlers went through, during the early years of the Jamestown. It says "then swords, armes, peices, or anything, wee traded with the Salvages, whose cruell fingers were so oft inbrewed in our blouds, that by their crueltie our Governours indiscretion, and the losse of our ships" From what I can gather from this, it says that they traded with the Native Americans their weapons, and anything they could find, for food, which in turn caused devastation as they Natives used these weapons against the settlers supply ships.

It describes the condition of the lack of food with "there remained not past sixtie men, women and children, most miserable and poor creatures..." it likens them to the horses they have not feed, because of the major lack of food. It even details circumstances of cannibalism, as the writer says "a Salvage we slew and buried, the poorer tooke him up againe and eat him" and another case of a man killing his wife and eating her, before being found out and executed.

It seems that during the very first few years after establishing Jamestown, the settlers had many things to worry about, for example the food situation after their supplies from England ran dry, they did not know how to farm from the land as they did in England. Other problems included the Natives attacking them and destroying ships and killing men. The fact that they had the settlers had to rely on the Natives in a way, created some sort of friendship, yet still one that would be broken by both parties.


Source

Woodforde and America

The diary I've found was written by Robert Woodforde, a diarist born in the town of Old, to a close-knit family of puritans. Known throughout his life for having a strong sense of morals and being very involved in the religious community of his town, he later ventured into a career in law, meaning he was free to travel around New Hampshire and visit the numerous religious communities that had sprang up thanks to the 'Great Migration'.
An excerpt from his diary reads
"Lord we blesse thee for the great fruitfullnes of the gentiles, the Lord increase us a thousandfold, but Lord let not the wife be allwayes barren, & bringe in the remainder of the gentiles in America & otherwhere, and let the spirit of reformacon passe through this Island & Ireland & the adiacent kingdomes.

pull downe that cursed Antichrist of Rome that Babilon the great may fall in these o(u)r Dayes.Lord thou seest how the wicked B(ishop) limbs of hime here in this kingdome have even darkned the sunne in the heavens thereof & brought up a fog over the whole nacon."

This excerpt is very useful to anyone wanting to know anymore about puritan values at the time, their views on the 'Antichrist of Rome' and Catholicism. It's real point of interest comes from the opening lines, where Woodforde asks the Lord to bless not only America, but also the new Americans. He asks to 'increase us a thousandfold' indicating that he not only hopes for America to become a sort of paradise for people sharing in puritan values, but also a place for any person seeking to escape places like England and Holland, which were deemed too sinful. Its importance is based on the early idea of America as a nation - Woodforde is already proud of America and already has a sense of identity and what it means to be an American.

Verazzanos Voyage!

Captain John De Verazzano was ordered by Francis І of France to travel to the West Continent in 1524. He set sail with 50 men on the 17^th of January, with enough supplies to last 8 months.

It took them just over a month to get to their first stop on the West border of the United States. Their first encounter was with a few natives living in that area.

“Many people who were seen coming to the sea-side fled at our approach but occasionally stopping. They looked back upon us with astonishment, and some were at length induced, by various friendly signs, to come to us.”

Obviously, and understandably, the natives were weary of the newcomers to their land and a few were distressed and left them. Others, were more kind of, mesmerized by them and their dress. Verazzano goes to state that some of the natives showed great delight in their outfits and complexion.

It seems to me that Verazzano really writes about their time in the new land in a systematic way. It is very as-it-happens written. The natives were the very first thing they came in contact with, and instead of looking at them and describing their nature, he writes about their reaction first.

He then gets a bit of time to really look and see who is helping him and his men onto the land. He describes their naked bodies in details from their stature, broad chests to their formed arms and legs.

“Not very strong in body, but acute in mind, active and swift on foot”

He realises that although they may not be the biggest men, or the strongest they have very quick minds and would be able to use that as an advantage. I think that Verazzano would be more weary of this that their strong figure.

He also mentioned that two of the men looked like they were from the East, and were different from the rest of the men they were talking with.

After their encounter with the natives, the men were able to wander around the land that they had found. The whole shore that they saw was covered in sand and they saw “beautiful fields, broad plains covered in immense forests of trees”.

They were amazed at the land they were seeing and only used positive words to describe it. He listed flowers, animals and colours that they saw in amazement compared to that of France.

They left this place in search of a new land, so travelled north east along the coast. But, unlike the first stop, it was not easy to pull into the harbour, seeing as there was none. So, again, there were natives watching them and offering to help them. One young sailor jumped into the water attempting to send them looking-glasses and other resources that may have been useful. But he was taken by the waves and pulled ashore, seen as dead by everyone around. (The young sailor survived.)

Verazzano described this experience in quite a lot of detail and I believe that they were astonished at this man’s determination to help them without knowing a thing about their motives or who they were.

“One of their noble deeds of friendship deserves to be made known your majesty”

http://content.wisconsinhistory.org/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/aj&CISOPTR=115

Francis Cample (An Irish Catholic in Pennsylvania)

Francis Cample travelled from Dublin, Ireland to Pennsylvania, America in 1734 and became a Merchant, Farmer and Land Agent. This account details the creation of the town Shippensburg. Many early settlers to the United States told stories of its promise and the greatness of its size, Cample's journal is no different "It is not the grandeur of rocks, cascades and romantic glens, but it is the beautiful panorama of forest and plain spread out in all their beauty which meets you everywhere, and which will, at no very far distant day, become the happy home of intelligent, God-fearing people, when the savage shall have passed forever from its borders" This shows the aesthetic appeal America first had as there was vast areas of land untouched but for the Native Americans.

"James McCall, to-day, in sinking the well in front of his house, deeper, he struck a fine stream of good water, which will be of great advantage to us all." There was a huge supply of natural resources in America at the time which also made it very appealing for the early settlers. "Our settlement is increasing rapidly, and our village, which has been named Shippens-burg, has several substantial houses in it. The stone house of Samuel Perry, in which the Widow Piper now keeps tavern, together with that of Daniel Duncan, just finished, are both good substantial two-story houses." Cample tells of how quickly the town developed and began to become populated with other British and French settlers. This journal entry gives us an insight into what parts of America were like for early settlers and why it was so appealing.

However it was inevitable that with all these new settlers coming into the native land there would be disputes over who rightfully owns the land. "A quarrel occurred last night out at the Spring amongst a party of drunken Indians, during which, four of their cabins were set on fire, and burned to the ground. One of the Indians, named Bright Star, a desperate man, was seriously injured in the fight, and will likely die of his wounds." What began as settlers reaping the rewards of this new land was soon turned into greed as people wanted as much land as possible and the financial gain that came with it, this undoubtedly meant there would be disputes.

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/becomingamer/growth/text4/irishpennsylvania.pdf

Cuba's relationship with America

From: http://progresoweekly.com/2/index.phpoption=com_content&view=article&id=1267:wola-un-vote-to-condemn-cuba-embargo-isolates-us-in-hemisphere&catid=44:lastest-news&Itemid=61

This image showed that Cuba have a negative attitude towards America. They feel it is the embargo that is the root cause of this, and the main barrier that is straining their relations. This is most probably linked back to the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. Although most countries in the UN want the embargo lifted the US seem reluctant, and Cuba seem to have developed a hatred toward America because of this. Cuba feels America is isolating itself, especially because of the banning of trading between Cuba and America, as well as travel between the two regions. As America is large (in land mass and international authority), Cuba feel that America is 'calling the shots' in political affairs. An almost jealous attitude as developed in Cuba because of it, and due to their size, I think they feel that they cannot compete politically.

New Immigration Law In Arizona Triggers Heavy Mexican Criticism

Mexican President Felipe Calderon criticized on Sunday a tough new immigration law in the U.S. state of Arizona. Calderon advised Mexicans to avoid unnecessary visits to Arizona, which borders Mexico.

Currently attending an international climate conference in Germany, Calderon spoke at a news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

[Felipe Calderon, Mexican President]:
"It violates the human rights of all people, independent of their migratory status. It has a focus that discriminates on a racial basis and threatens not just the human rights of Mexican migrants in the United States, but of those of any other country even the Mexican-American or Hispanic-American population that live in that country, in that state."

Under the new legislation, state police and local police are required to determine if people are in the country illegally, based on “reasonable suspicion”.

[Felipe Calderon, Mexican President]:
"We've strengthened our consular protective capacity through five Mexican consulates in Arizona. We've also issued a travel alert so that we can let our citizens know the legislation's scope and avoid Mexicans suffering discrimination or oppressive treatment in Arizona. We underscore the necessity to act with caution and to avoid as much as possible unnecessary visits to that state."

The Mexican president says that he will bring up the new law when he meets with U.S. President Barack Obama next month during an official visit to Washington.


In many way I agree with Felipe Calderon. I can undestand that the state Arizona want to keep illegal immigrants out of the U.S. but it needs to be taken to an extent. I agree with the Mexican president as I also think it is against human rights. I believe that the new legislation it is totally unreasonable for state and local police to ask Hispanic-American or Mexican-American for legal documents to show they are allowed to be in the country. In my opinion it is very racist as these people could have lived there all their life and are entitled to be there as any other American citizen. This is discrimination at it's fullest.

However it has to be recognised that the state of Arizona is on the border of Mexico and probably hundereds of illegal immigrants cross the border of American everyday. Also this is not exactly valid as this new legislation has only occured in one state out of fifty and therefore cannot hold this view that American's are not open to migration.

In conclusion I have to agree that the new legislation is very discriminative against Hispanic-American's and Mexican-American's but cannot be looked at the entire "American" view.

http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=6369222243755751876

How anti-American are the French?

Often when we think of French views of America, we immediately think of negative ones due to their patchy relationship throughout the years, however in 2004 'The Economist' held a poll which revealed that this is not exactly the case.

"In one 2004 poll, 72% of the French had a favourable view of Americans, more even than in Britain (62%) or Spain (47%). Some 68% of those questioned in another poll the same year said that what unites France and America was more important than what separates them. During the 60th anniversary of the Normandy landings in 2004, politicians were frosty, but the people at large showed an outpouring of gratitude to American veterans."

There is a considerable gap between the opinions of French people on the United States with American People, it is understood that at the time of this poll the feeling coming out of France were not anti-American but anti-Bush.

"So strike one for the Economist: yes, French anti-Americanism is not as clear-cut as most people think it is (the reverse is also true, by the way). And yes, “France quarrels with America not because the pair are so different but because they are so alike“, each country being convinced of the universality of its national model. And yet the article is mildly infuriating, as only Economist articles can be."

This contradicts many peoples assumptions that the French dislike Americans due to the contrast in their lifestyles, the French are known for their healthy and active ways of life whereas the Americans are the pioneers of the 'fast food' lifestyle, it is unclear as to whether or not France as a nation is an Anti-American nation or whether the reputation from their history proceeds them.

And yet despite the contrast of lifestyles even in France we seen Americanisation through even the French intellectuals who laugh at America's gun laws and obesity levels. Ask a French journalist for some of his favourite films and it wouldn't be surprising to see big Hollywood blockbusters by the likes of Spielberg as answers.

Perhaps the idea of France being Anti-American is not due to what they hate about the country, whether it be lifestyle, president or mindset but maybe the French hate how they have adopted many aspects of American life, just like the rest of Europe, and use their hatred of America to hide their hatred for themselves endorsing American culture.

http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/how-anti-american-are-the-french/

Chávez and the Earthquake Machines

Venezuela and America have had a very rocky relationship in recent years. Historically, the two have depended on each other for trade and investment for many years, and while at times the relationship has been strained, the two have always managed to maintain a fairly healthy relationship. That was however, until Hugo Chávez assumed power in 1999. A notoriously out-spoken figure and never one to shy away from controversy, Chávez has never been a fan of the U.S, something which came to a head in the failed coup d'état of 2002. Accusing the U.S of involvement in the failed attempt, Chávez's anti-American rhetoric has only gotten worse, more personal, and in the ultimate show of resistance, Venezuela has now warmly opened up talks with the old enemy Russia, and new enemy Iran, to the extent where there has been talk of opening a Kalashnikov rifle factory and Iranian tractors are being assembled in Venezuela*. So, one could imagine that after accusing the ever-popular former president George W. Bush of being 'stupid' and a 'devil', Chávez would be pleased to see a new president, one in the form of the Nobel Peace Prize winning Barack Obama. Initially, opinion polls in Venezuela rated him very highly, and Chávez himself hoped that U.S - Venezuelan relations would ease. However, true to form, Chávez has begun attacking the Obama administration, and this article from the Venezulan government, is just everybit ridiculous as anything Chávez has ever claimed.
Taking its 'facts' from a Russian report, this news article claims that the U.S was behind the devastating Haitian Earthquake, which displaced a million people, killed a quarter of a million, and injured 300,000.

"Since late 1970, the United States has "tremendous progress" state of its weapons of earthquakes and, according to these reports, now employs a technology devices using Pulse, Plasma and Sonic with Tesla Electromagnetic bombs wave shock. "

This quite blatantly false report, which if true would have been covered by the world media, was unsurprisingly ignored by major news outlets, and in fact, I'd never heard of such a fantastical machine before today. I think that the outlandish statement made in this article is quite telling of the foreign policy of Venezuela, especially when it comes to the U.S. The website that the article is from is actually a government funded/run news organization, so in reality, the article is propaganda. The fact that Venezuelan officials feel the need to run propaganda regarding the U.S is also telling, as many of the most recognisable culinary exports of America such as Starbucks, McDonald's, Burger King and KFC are visible in major cities like Caracas, and many popular U.S shows are re-dubbed in Spanish, also the need for American produced items such as cars has grown. So, perhaps the main purpose of this article is rooted in more cultural reasons, as previously stated, Venezuela has started to open itself to Iranian and Russian machinery, so maybe the point is to alienate the U.S from Venezuelan people, and bring in more, as the NY Times put it '...toward what he considers more like minded nations'.


Primary Sourch - http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vive.gob.ve%2Finf_art.php%3Fid_not%3D15464%26id_s%3D3

* secondary source - http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/16/world/americas/16venezuela.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Al Jazeera vs. the BP oil spill.

Throughout this post, I'll be discussing Al Jazeera's article on the BP oil spill, and how the U.S reacted and dealt with this crisis. The article offers criticisms that most probably weren't reported or widely released to the western public. Al Jazeera, is an Arabic news network that covers stories from around the world, usually giving a very different opinion from the western media.

The article states "The US government has been accused of blocking efforts by scientists to inform the public about just how bad the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico could become." this suggests that the American government are clearly holding back information that is worse than they had expected. It seems that Al Jazeera is criticising the way the U.S has handled releasing information to the public, when it clearly affects them as well.

It goes on to say how it was wrong that "Obama's senior energy adviser for mischaracterising a government analysis on national television by saying it showed most of the oil was "gone"." It explains how Carol Browner told NBC's Today show that most of the oil had gone, when in fact the oil was very much still there, even if it was "dispersed, dissolved or evaporated". These facts that were held back from the American public, are clearly outed here and the flaws in the government's control over the situation.

Al Jazeera became popular to western audiences during 9/11 and afterwards, with its open and often controversial coverage of events such as the live coverage of the war in Afghanistan. Its journalism doesn't hold back vital information or details that the western media would. It has become a very popular website for western people to visit for more information and unbiased stories.

Source.

China & The States.

China is actually split into two sections. People’s Republic of China (PRC) is the mainland China and Republic of China (ROC) is the area of Taiwan. This is one area that is affecting PRC and America’s relationship but that’s a different story.

Within this post, I will be focusing on the relationship between PRC and the states, as that holds the most negativity and debate. Peoples Republic of China and the States have always had that rocky relationship in the past, and still today there are some strains.

They both realise and understand how powerful they are and work with that to stand for what they believe in and to work towards achieving them. But, they both understand the importance of becoming countries that they can depend on and communicate well with. If PRC and the States can have that connection, that status, they will be able to use it to change the world for the better. I believe that we can still hope for this in the future, as right now, they have conflicting points of views.

So, on Saturday 8^th October 2010, the United Nations held their Climate Change meeting in Tianjin, their final one before the summit in Mexico next month. And, of course, both China and the States were present.

Therefore, like every other large broadcaster, Xinhua were reporting it to the Chinese public. The Xinhua is one of Chinas (Peoples Republic of China – that is) largest news broadcaster, not unlike that of the BBC over here.

Within the actual meeting, it seems that the United States and China had some issues with each other and each broadcaster took a somewhat different approach as to what happened and who was actually to blame. Xinhua wrote about the issue, but as a large broadcaster company the writers (Liu Jie and Fu Shuangqi) could not be too judgemental towards either party. But I think I was looking for a Chinese biased review or it might have been my prejudice against China came into it, I’m not sure.

The article talks about China’s expectations for what happened between the two countries which I think, helps them feel better about their part in the debate. They were waiting for America to start something with them and maybe that takes the blame off of China and their views. Whereas, America seem to be more accepting of equal blames and the work the still need to put in together to create that unity. I feel that the way to explain this is that China sees themselves as the adult, waiting for America, the child, to pick a silly fight and bicker with them.

The article states,

“As the world's two major economies and emitters, China and the United States are under close scrutiny in their emissions cutting moves, but tensions between them over who should act first and do more showed no sign of abating in Tianjin.

Todd Stern, the U.S. special envoy for climate change, said Friday that China had ignored its commitment made in the Copenhagen Accord while only committing itself to voluntary efforts.

Chinese officials had acted like the agreement "never happened," he said in a speech at the University of Michigan.”

It seems that both parties believe the other is to blame and their tension was brought forward into the meeting the next day.

The Chinese government believes that there should be more of a division between the developed countries and the developing. The developing should be the countries where emissions are cut most. Whereas America, backed by the developing countries, believes that every country should be included in the binding treaty.

Hopefully both sides can realise that together they will make a much bigger impact on the world’s development.

News Article

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-10/09/c_13549225.htm