"The basic American promise that if you work hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college." - Barack Obama
This contemporary statement uses the idea of the American Dream in regards to the notion that hard work will pay off. As long as you work hard, you will be rewarded.
In Ragged Dick it could be argued that Dick himself embodies this, in that although he is a boy on the streets, it is his hard work and determination that enable him to slowly move up in life. However, there is also the fact that some people manage to see promise in Dick, and it could be argued that if it wasn't for them, then Dick would not have managed to achieve as much as he has.
This statement is also in keeping with the idea of individual success, in this case having a job that you can aspire to be successful in. This idea matches that of the notion of success in Ragged Dick, for example, thanks to his wit and street-smarts Dick is able to overcome many of his problems, and save money that he has gathered from his hard work and wit. Although, many argue that it Dick's luck alone which allows him to succeed. However, if Dick had not had to survive by working, then he wouldn't know how to act in order to help himself get further, and it is his experiences which have helped him be able to use his determination and hard work to help him succeed.
In order for Dick to have a successful life, he needed to work hard, and this statement highlights the message, by telling American's that hard work will lead to an enjoyable and full life. And that even if you come from poverty, or are not well-off you can become comfortable in the future if you only work hard.
Thursday, 28 November 2013
Wednesday, 27 November 2013
American Dream & Ragged Dick
The notion of the 'American dream' is shown by those today,
who although had lived a poor and troubled past have become highly successful
through their pure determination and hard work, such as Dick's perserverance to
become 'spectable' in 'Ragged Dick'. An example of someone who had developed
from 'rag to riches' was John D. Rockefeller who started off in poverty yet
through his hard work he became the first 'business superstar' by creating the
standard oil company which dominated the oil industry.
Rockefeller was raised single handedly by his mother who had taught him the value of hard work, such as Fosdick teaches Dick. In 'Ragged Dick' Dick was street smart which allowed him to flourish and Rockefeller's analytical skills led to his success. In addition, such as 'Ragged Dick' Rockefeller's story can also be considered as 'rags to respectability' and not 'rags to riches' as the wealth which Rockefeller had created was largely given out to charities. He said 'Having been endowed with the gift I possess, I believe it is my duty to make money and still more and to use the money I make for the good of my fellow man according to the dictates of my conscience.' This shows that in both cases, the idea of the 'American Dream' was not merely to increase their wealth, rather the hard work which they endured was to achieve a better life for themselves.
Rockefeller also had the luck of others to guide him. He states that without his wife 'I would be a poor man.' Such as Dick would have been if he had no one willing to educate him.
Rockefeller was raised single handedly by his mother who had taught him the value of hard work, such as Fosdick teaches Dick. In 'Ragged Dick' Dick was street smart which allowed him to flourish and Rockefeller's analytical skills led to his success. In addition, such as 'Ragged Dick' Rockefeller's story can also be considered as 'rags to respectability' and not 'rags to riches' as the wealth which Rockefeller had created was largely given out to charities. He said 'Having been endowed with the gift I possess, I believe it is my duty to make money and still more and to use the money I make for the good of my fellow man according to the dictates of my conscience.' This shows that in both cases, the idea of the 'American Dream' was not merely to increase their wealth, rather the hard work which they endured was to achieve a better life for themselves.
Rockefeller also had the luck of others to guide him. He states that without his wife 'I would be a poor man.' Such as Dick would have been if he had no one willing to educate him.
Thursday, 21 November 2013
Pro or Anti Gun Control?
Pro-Gun Control - http://theprogressivecynic.com/debunking-right-wing-talking-points/refuting-gun-enthusiasts-anti-gun-control-arguments/
This article reveals that according to FBI statistics
from the beginning of 2012, approximately 25 people are murdered every day in
shootings in the USA. This number is aggressively high, with around 9125 deaths
per year and a sharp rise in massacres such as the one that happened at Sandy
Hook many people are advocating higher regulations on gun control. But there
are still people who lobby for more relaxed weapon regulations. Many people
blame popular culture for the rise in gun crime but if you look at the
statistics they show little to no correlation between violent scenes in video games and gun crime. It may also be poignant to mention that the united states has the most lenient weapons regulations out of the countries on this table.
Anti-Gun Control - http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/movies/assaulted-civil-rights-under-fire-is-a-paean-to-the-second-amendment.html?ref=guncontrol&_r=0
In this review of the
documentary, ‘Assaulted: Civil Rights under
Fire’, by Kris Koenig, the New York Times is showing a side of
the argument that is rarely popularised. Something that is often heard is the
argument that if a burglar came into somebody's house, that somebody should be
allowed to open fire. But the documentary takes on a much more complex question
as it asks if women, homosexuals and those with disabilities should be able to
carry weapons as self-defence from hate crimes, it argues that these people are
vulnerable and guns are reasonable protection. But surely if these so called
"vulnerable" people are allowed to be carrying weapons, then their
assailants are more likely to be as well. The documentary even goes as far as
to state that Pro-Gun Control laws are akin to the tyranny of dictators such as
Hitler or Stalin. This shows how passionate and serious American citizens are
about their second amendment rights and this could be seen as a reason that
they should not be armed.
Wednesday, 20 November 2013
Pro and Anti Gun Control in America
Pro Gun Control
http://handguncontrol.org/
Anti-Gun Control
http://www.nraila.org/
The NRA-ILA webpage is a website which is very clearly pro-guns in America. It was established in 1975, and the Institute for Legislative Action is is known as the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association. The website promotes gun ownership and is against the idea of stricter gun control being enforced. The NRA is well known for their Anti-Gun Control views, and teamed together with the ILA, are able to make a clearer argument as the ILA is involved in any issue that directly or indirectly affects firearms ownership and use. The site features news and opinions, all to related to gun ownership and use, and Obama is often referenced to as meeting with officials about gun control laws. An article from this year, explains how gun related accidents have dramatically fallen, arguing their case that guns are not harmful, and "the odds are more than a million to one, against a child in the U.S. dying in a firearm accident."
I myself, happen to be pro gun control, especially when it comes to children and all the horrifying statistics. It is incomprehensible to me how easy it can be for anyone to buy, carry or own a gun. Although, it is obviously because of my environment, and how rare this kind of thing is in Britain.To counter the American view, I'm sure the majority of British people have never even touched a real gun. However, I do understand this view, as it is far more a part of their culture and seen as "American" in practice. Hunting is obviously a very popular activity and if it has been enjoyed for their entire lives, one can see why they might perhaps want to continue.
http://handguncontrol.org/
This Web
page is in favour of controlling the use of guns in America. It has many
articles featuring news of recent shootings, as well as containing presidential
and legislation updates. For example the site advertises Brady’s Campaign to
Prevent Gun Violence, as well as featuring facts and statistics about Gun
Violence. The website is as of recently, promoting background checks on anyone who wishes to own a gun.
Anti-Gun Control
http://www.nraila.org/
The NRA-ILA webpage is a website which is very clearly pro-guns in America. It was established in 1975, and the Institute for Legislative Action is is known as the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association. The website promotes gun ownership and is against the idea of stricter gun control being enforced. The NRA is well known for their Anti-Gun Control views, and teamed together with the ILA, are able to make a clearer argument as the ILA is involved in any issue that directly or indirectly affects firearms ownership and use. The site features news and opinions, all to related to gun ownership and use, and Obama is often referenced to as meeting with officials about gun control laws. An article from this year, explains how gun related accidents have dramatically fallen, arguing their case that guns are not harmful, and "the odds are more than a million to one, against a child in the U.S. dying in a firearm accident."
I myself, happen to be pro gun control, especially when it comes to children and all the horrifying statistics. It is incomprehensible to me how easy it can be for anyone to buy, carry or own a gun. Although, it is obviously because of my environment, and how rare this kind of thing is in Britain.To counter the American view, I'm sure the majority of British people have never even touched a real gun. However, I do understand this view, as it is far more a part of their culture and seen as "American" in practice. Hunting is obviously a very popular activity and if it has been enjoyed for their entire lives, one can see why they might perhaps want to continue.
Pro and Anti Gun Control
Pro Gun Control: http://www.americanprogress.org/
The website above is for a think tank called Centre for American Progress (CAP), which whilst describing themselves as non partisan is regarded by most to be a liberal think tank which promotes all liberal ideals, which includes strict gun control laws. They provide a section of their website to articles about guns and gun laws and all are looking at the issue from a negative perspective. Many articles show the negative impact of guns on America and look at how the government can get rid of the second Amendment. Some include promotion for anti gun activists while others talk about the weak gun law states, such as Florida, which has the 'stand your ground' law.
Anti Gun control: https://www.tsra.com/
The Texas State Rifle Association (TSRA) is an organisation that was set up in 1919 which promotes gun ownership in Texas. They support and sponsor shooting matches and teams from Texas, as well as supporting anti gun control measures. Its slogan 'Protecting Texas Gun Rights Since 1919' is a clear statement of support for gun ownership. It also proudly states it is a friend of the National Rifle Association on its homepage. Its mission statement contains three simple missions; to champion and support the rights of Texans to own and enjoy firearms; to protect and defend the inalienable rights of the individual Texan to acquire, possess, transport, carry, transfer ownership and enjoy firearms; to support junior education and rifle teams in Texas.
Both websites promote their beliefs either obviously like the TSRA website does or more subtly like CAP's does. Whilst CAP doesn't endorse political figures the TSRA has its own Political Action Committee which promotes candidates that support gun rights. However the websites wouldn't usually be viewed by people who are of opposing views to the websites, so you could argue the beliefs they promote are not likely to change minds.
The website above is for a think tank called Centre for American Progress (CAP), which whilst describing themselves as non partisan is regarded by most to be a liberal think tank which promotes all liberal ideals, which includes strict gun control laws. They provide a section of their website to articles about guns and gun laws and all are looking at the issue from a negative perspective. Many articles show the negative impact of guns on America and look at how the government can get rid of the second Amendment. Some include promotion for anti gun activists while others talk about the weak gun law states, such as Florida, which has the 'stand your ground' law.
Anti Gun control: https://www.tsra.com/
The Texas State Rifle Association (TSRA) is an organisation that was set up in 1919 which promotes gun ownership in Texas. They support and sponsor shooting matches and teams from Texas, as well as supporting anti gun control measures. Its slogan 'Protecting Texas Gun Rights Since 1919' is a clear statement of support for gun ownership. It also proudly states it is a friend of the National Rifle Association on its homepage. Its mission statement contains three simple missions; to champion and support the rights of Texans to own and enjoy firearms; to protect and defend the inalienable rights of the individual Texan to acquire, possess, transport, carry, transfer ownership and enjoy firearms; to support junior education and rifle teams in Texas.
Both websites promote their beliefs either obviously like the TSRA website does or more subtly like CAP's does. Whilst CAP doesn't endorse political figures the TSRA has its own Political Action Committee which promotes candidates that support gun rights. However the websites wouldn't usually be viewed by people who are of opposing views to the websites, so you could argue the beliefs they promote are not likely to change minds.
Pro and Anti Gun Control
Anti-gun control:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/caption-contests/
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/guns-ammo-editor-apologizes-to-outraged-readers-for-publishing-pro-gun-control-editorial
As 'Guns and Ammo' is the most popular shooting magazine in the United States, it is obvious that they don't support gun control. Their magazine and online magazine focus on the idea of shooting as a hobby and of collecting guns as a hobby. There are sections such as the 'Guns and Ammo Holiday Gift Guide' and the promotion of buying guns like they are normal gifts is a shocking concept to British audiences, particularly as we hold the Firearms Act which bans the free ownership of guns but requires them to be registered; a law that 'Guns and Ammo' readers would find shocking. They were coincidentally outraged when Jim Bequette ('Guns and Ammo' editor) wrote an article vying for gun control saying that it wouldn't impede on the Second Amendment, only to be met with magazine boycott threats and his firing from the magazine. This demonstrates how much Americans value guns in their everyday lives, especially considering that the magazine tends to promote gun use like an innocent sport.
There is also a 'Caption Contest' section which is perhaps the most difficult to articulate as it makes gun handling seem humorous and joke worthy. For example, the fact that there are pictures of foxes and cats yielding guns along side a man holding probably an eight foot long gun show just how carelessly and inappropriate some Americans can be towards gun ownership, and how their agreement with gun control is still very absent.
I support gun control because I believe that the free ownership of guns causes more problems than it does protection. For example, in America more than half of all murders begin from arguments with friends, family or lovers and more Americans are killed by guns each week than each year in all of Western Europe. However, I can see how the freedom to carry guns provides the feeling of protection and therefore power and that shooting can be an innocent sport to give a sense of camaraderie amongst friends, but the evidence seems to show that the idea of gun control should be taken more seriously than it is.
Pro-gun control:
http://www.bradycampaign.org/
The 'Brady Campaign for Gun Control' was founded in 1974 (under a different name) in the attempt to control handguns after Dr. Mark Borinsky was robbed and nearly killed at gunpoint. All of the people involved in the organisation have had an experience with gun violence, whether it be being shot themselves or knowing somebody, and this helps the organisation's appeal to support due to the reality of gun violence.
The 'Brady Campaign' fights for sensible gun laws that address gun violence at the federal and state level. Supporters of the 'Brady Campaign' are the American public and electing officials and they show their support for gun control through various demonstrations, the education of people about gun violence and gun safety, the honouring of gun violence victims and the receiving of donations towards their campaign for gun control.
The 'Brady Campaign' is a very relatable approach to the reality of gun violence and its reputation in America. It is a worthy cause and is a movement in the right direction towards the making of gun control normality.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/caption-contests/
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/guns-ammo-editor-apologizes-to-outraged-readers-for-publishing-pro-gun-control-editorial
As 'Guns and Ammo' is the most popular shooting magazine in the United States, it is obvious that they don't support gun control. Their magazine and online magazine focus on the idea of shooting as a hobby and of collecting guns as a hobby. There are sections such as the 'Guns and Ammo Holiday Gift Guide' and the promotion of buying guns like they are normal gifts is a shocking concept to British audiences, particularly as we hold the Firearms Act which bans the free ownership of guns but requires them to be registered; a law that 'Guns and Ammo' readers would find shocking. They were coincidentally outraged when Jim Bequette ('Guns and Ammo' editor) wrote an article vying for gun control saying that it wouldn't impede on the Second Amendment, only to be met with magazine boycott threats and his firing from the magazine. This demonstrates how much Americans value guns in their everyday lives, especially considering that the magazine tends to promote gun use like an innocent sport.
There is also a 'Caption Contest' section which is perhaps the most difficult to articulate as it makes gun handling seem humorous and joke worthy. For example, the fact that there are pictures of foxes and cats yielding guns along side a man holding probably an eight foot long gun show just how carelessly and inappropriate some Americans can be towards gun ownership, and how their agreement with gun control is still very absent.
I support gun control because I believe that the free ownership of guns causes more problems than it does protection. For example, in America more than half of all murders begin from arguments with friends, family or lovers and more Americans are killed by guns each week than each year in all of Western Europe. However, I can see how the freedom to carry guns provides the feeling of protection and therefore power and that shooting can be an innocent sport to give a sense of camaraderie amongst friends, but the evidence seems to show that the idea of gun control should be taken more seriously than it is.
Pro-gun control:
http://www.bradycampaign.org/
The 'Brady Campaign for Gun Control' was founded in 1974 (under a different name) in the attempt to control handguns after Dr. Mark Borinsky was robbed and nearly killed at gunpoint. All of the people involved in the organisation have had an experience with gun violence, whether it be being shot themselves or knowing somebody, and this helps the organisation's appeal to support due to the reality of gun violence.
The 'Brady Campaign' fights for sensible gun laws that address gun violence at the federal and state level. Supporters of the 'Brady Campaign' are the American public and electing officials and they show their support for gun control through various demonstrations, the education of people about gun violence and gun safety, the honouring of gun violence victims and the receiving of donations towards their campaign for gun control.
The 'Brady Campaign' is a very relatable approach to the reality of gun violence and its reputation in America. It is a worthy cause and is a movement in the right direction towards the making of gun control normality.
Pro and anti gun control
Pro Gun control:
http://csgv.org/
The 'Coalition to stop gun violence' believes that all Americans have a right to live in a community free from gun violence and thus seeks to secure freedom from gun violence through many strategies to keep guns away from violent individuals.
The CSGV consists of 48 organizations and the website appears to be very convincing as it includes news articles, facts and figures to back up its arguments. For example, the website states that 40% of gun sales are made without any background checks which therefore gives convicted felons, the mentally ill etc, unchecked access to firearms and therefore a background check is deemed necessary. For example, they aim to prohibit individuals who are on the government watch list from purchasing guns. However a problem with this is that it although an individual may have a clean background, they still may purchase a firearm with bad intentions in the future. Or despite their violent past, some may wish to purchase a gun in self defence yet would not be able to do so.
The 'Coalition to stop gun violence' believes that all Americans have a right to live in a community free from gun violence and thus seeks to secure freedom from gun violence through many strategies to keep guns away from violent individuals.
The CSGV consists of 48 organizations and the website appears to be very convincing as it includes news articles, facts and figures to back up its arguments. For example, the website states that 40% of gun sales are made without any background checks which therefore gives convicted felons, the mentally ill etc, unchecked access to firearms and therefore a background check is deemed necessary. For example, they aim to prohibit individuals who are on the government watch list from purchasing guns. However a problem with this is that it although an individual may have a clean background, they still may purchase a firearm with bad intentions in the future. Or despite their violent past, some may wish to purchase a gun in self defence yet would not be able to do so.
This website states that 'Guns don't kill people, gun
control laws kill people'
It states that gun control laws are not necessarily putting an end to gun violence in the U.S, stating that "Gun-free" zones are actually "Free killing" zones as gun control laws prohibit the people from protecting themselves. I think the websites arguments are convincing as for example, it states that the perpetrator is aware that he is entering a gun free zone and therefore acknowledges that the victims have no way to protect themselves. Thus, the constitution believes it is in each man and woman's right to serve as self defenders and to be adequately armed in order to protect themselves.
It states that gun control laws are not necessarily putting an end to gun violence in the U.S, stating that "Gun-free" zones are actually "Free killing" zones as gun control laws prohibit the people from protecting themselves. I think the websites arguments are convincing as for example, it states that the perpetrator is aware that he is entering a gun free zone and therefore acknowledges that the victims have no way to protect themselves. Thus, the constitution believes it is in each man and woman's right to serve as self defenders and to be adequately armed in order to protect themselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)