Veil Over My Eyes

       The Souls of Black Folk, outlines W.E.B. du Bois feelings out the right of the Southern blacks. These people deserve equal rights and should be allowed to vote, go to a good school, and be treated like any other person. du Bois refers to himself as "different from the others; or like, mayhap, in heart and life and longing, but shut out from their world world by a vast veil. I had thereafter no desire to tear down that veil, to creep through; I held all beyond it in common contempt, and lived above it in a region of blue sky and real wandering shadows" (du Bois 2). This veil idea is referenced multiple times in The Souls of Black Folk. du Bois says that others see themselves through another person's visor. He refers to this as double-consciousness. "It is peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of world that looks on in amused contempt and pity" (du Bois 3). This veil du Bois mentions is one of a racial segregation. He sees the world as place of equals and equal opportunities which is why he believes Southern blacks should have equal opportunities as whites. However du Bois also realizes that the world has not caught up to his vision. There is still unrest between the different races. However, he is floating above the hatred in a world of happiness and acceptance. du Bois was truly a visionary and a civil rights activist. 


Question: Do you ever feel like you can see things more clearly than others and are able to hover above their veil? 

White Supremacy....Ew!

           Reading Rudyard Kipling's, The White Man's Burden, was disturbing to say the least. The tone of this poems suggests that whites should and have an obligation to rule over people of other ethnic backgrounds. Kipling comes across as a racist in this poem. He refers to non-whites like some referred to the Native Americans, "half-devil and half-child". This two words suggest two things, non-whites are like beasts and are evil. And secondly, this other people are stupid and childish. Kipling says we should approach these people, with "open speech and simple", as if the people are too dumb to understand sophisticated speech. Later on Kipling's poem he writes, "go mark them with your living, and mark them with your dead", signifying the bloodshed in a white man's burden. 


          Honestly, I am disgusted by Rudyard Kipling's poem. I disagree with everything he says and I don't believe at all in white supremacy. Kipling was obviously sick in the head and anyone who agrees with the poem needs to rethink their beliefs. No man has the right to judge another man based on the color of his skin. Every race is equally as intelligent and able to comprend difficult speech. Colonization is good if it helps the other nations, not if it hinders and imprisons them. 


Question: What is your view on white supremacy? Disgusting or like Kipling says necessary? 

Bam! Boom! Bam!

        In George Orwells, Shooting an Elephant, the story begins with Orwell a telling of when Orwell was a police officer in Moulmein. During this time period, there was much political unrest due to the anti-European mindset of the locals. Because of Orwells position of authority, he must keep the locals in line as they make fun of him, even though in his heart he sympathizes with their pain and suffering. While doing his routine walks around the villages, Orwell's called to handle a wild elephant roaming the streets of one of the villages. Once he arrives at the village, Orwell at first thinks he must be part of a hoax, but sure enough there is a giant elephant galavanting in the street. Orwell, passes one trampled Indian man and decides he must shoot the elephant per the town-peoples requests.  Orwell, "did not want in the least to shoot him. I decided that I would watch him for a little while to make sure that he did not turn savage again, and then go home" (Orwell 2). However, "I glanced around the crowd that had followed me...they were watching me as they would watch a conjurer about to preform a trick. They did not like me, but with the magical rifle in my hands I was momentarily worth watching". It was at this moment that Orwell realized he had no choice but to shoot the elephant. The people were peer-pressuring him into shooting the animal and because Orwell's power was only what the people made it to be, he needed to remain in control of the situation. "A sahib has got to act like a sahib; he has got to appear resolute, to know his own mind and do definite things. To come all that way, rifle in hand, with two thousand people marching at my heels, and then to trail feebly away, having done nothing-no that was impossible. The crowd would laugh at me. And my whole life, every white man's life in the East, was one long struggle not to be laughed at" (Orwell 2). Therefore, Orwell shot the elephant, not because he wanted to or because it was the right thing to do, but he shot the elephant as to not look stupid in front of the Indians.


      So much of our lives at like the sahib's actions. We do things not because we want to do them, but because we feel the pressure of others' opinions impressing on our own moral code. Sometimes we do not act like we want to, but instead act like the group. In our heart of hearts we know we should be the individual in the crowd who takes a stand, but sometimes it is just too hard to stand out and we fade into the veil of the popular opinion. 


Question: What have you done in your life not because you wanted to do it, but because you would look stupid to others if you didn't? 

Communism

         In Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels book the Communist Manifesto, they published their opinions about the struggles between classes, the capitalist system, and the rise of the workers' power. As far as class system goes, the duo say, "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of the class struggles" (Engels & Marx 1). They argue that throughout all of time whether it be the freeman and the slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman all of these relationships simplify to being the oppressor and the oppressed. In the present day capitalist society, this relationship is shown by the proletariat facing the bourgeoisie. "The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society, has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of old ones" (Engels & Marx 1). The bourgeoisie is successful at maintaining superiority over the proletariat because of wage-labor. This means that the laborers bring some of the separation on themselves because, "wage-labor rests exclusively on competition between laborers. The advance of industry, whose involuntary promoter is the bourgeoisie, replaces the isolation of the laborers, due to competition, by their revolutionary combination, due to association" (Engels & Marx 3).
          This influences the rise of the proletariat. The proletariat will eventually rise to power due to the bourgeoisie's exploitation of the workers. A revolution will occur, but capitalism will still survive and the bourgeoisie will rise to power once again. The key to class equality in this society is capitalism, according to Marx and Engels.


Question: Americans hide from capitalism. Why is the common opinion so different in America compared to Germany?

Some Will Try and Fail

             

            The story "The Open Boat" is sad and depressing, but at the same time it shows how people can bond together through any circumstances and secure a bond that will stand many tests. In "The Open Boat", we learn of four survivors from an earlier sinking of their boat. The men are struggling to survive in their little dingy and all of them must work tirelessly, nonstop in order to keep the boat afloat. The men are: an oiler, the captain, the correspondant, and the cook. While the other three men work, the captain directs the dingy from the head. 


              As the story progresses the men find land. They rejoice and celebrate their feat! The correspondant even shares his last four cigars with his "brothers". However, the water is so rough and because there is no one out to help them ashore, they can't row ashore. Finally, the men believe they see a lone man on the shore. They wait out the night in hopes that help is coming to their rescue, but of course no one comes. 


              When morning comes, the captain suggests that the group get as close as they can and then it is each man for himself to swim to the shore. As the men make a break for it in the icy waters, a man plunges into the water  from the shore to help save the men. Three of the men survive, but the oiler was not so lucky. 


             In this story, I learned that it is important to trust other people. Humans all have an innate desire to live. Sometimes, the only thing you have in life to live for is the hope that everything will get better. Throughout having hope though, you have to act. You cannot wait for others to come and row your boat ashore, you have to fight. You have to show an inner strength for never giving up during the hard times. 


              It is easy to give up and it is also easy to let someone else do the hard work for yourself. In the story the men had worked so hard and then wanted others to finish the jobs for them. No one came. However when they showed that they wanted to fight for their lives, help came. It was a battle to live but three of the four men were lucky.


             Sometimes you're going to be that one man who doesn't get what you have worked hard for. It doesn't mean that you put in less effort or didn't deserve it, it just means you didn't have the luck that time. In this story, the luckless man would be the oiler. He worked just as hard as the rest of the men, but didn't get pulled ashore. 


Question: Have you ever been that one person who didn't get what they deserved? How did it feel?

The Heart is A Cruel Thing

              The poem "In the Desert", is a small poem but it is packed with meaning. In the poem, the narrator comes across a small creature who is eating his own heart. When asked if it is good, the creature replies, "It is bitter-bitter. But I like it because it is bitter and because it is my heart" (Crane 1). 


               The creature really shows the persona of almost every person on this Earth. We all believe that our hearts are good, pure, and clean. We, of course, see the good in ourselves. If we saw only the bad acts we commit we would all hate ourselves and that would be both an unhealthy and depressing world. So instead of discovering the pain we have caused, we discover the joy and happiness we have given to others. We love the kindness in our hearts, but in with all that kindness is a bitterness because man, deep down, is unpure. We are a sinful people and we spread so much bitterness with our tongue and with our actions that we leave a bitter mark on our hearts. Our hearts are marked with sin and due to this fact we almost love to act maliciously in certain situations. We have the saying, "what goes around comes around", and we use this to justify acting meanly towards other people. We love getting payback and therefore we sometimes love our bitterness. 


Question: If you looked truthfully at your own heart would you see mostly sinfulness or pure happiness?