Documentary

Inception

    The human mind in intricate and complex. To us it's still a fairly mysterious place many have attempted to ventured upon, but most have failed. Delving within our thoughts has become a science of trial and error which has brought both failure and success, but here The Shock Doctrine presents one of the long lasting manuals of mind exploration or rather, exploitation: KUBARK: Counter Intelligence Interrogation. 

     The truth serum, LCD experimentation, sensory depravation, and other types of torture have flooded the world since the beginnings of the Cold War and have survived to live through the resilient 'War On Terror'. These new methods that came to life in the mid 20th century were a breakthrough from the old and crude torture methods. New CIA led investigations brought forth techniques that gave more conclusive results in the interrogation room, and so a new spy era emerged. Governments now had a successful tool in the extraction of information from POW's or enemy insurgents. But what about indoctrination? How could they lead the battle of ideas and beat the red scare of the Cold War? This was a far more complex process because they had to change the minds of the public opinion in there favor and as we've seen through history they were successful of doing so not only in the US but also abroad. The KUBARK manual had given them entry into our head for extraction of ideas, but as Hollywood has demonstrated the hardest part is Inception. 

    To be successful at it, the US through the CIA, collaborated with several recognized educational institutions across the country and developed scholarship programs that sent Chilean and Indonesian students to schools in the States for indoctrination. They preached free market policy to them day and night and years later both of these countries, which had been strengthening their local economies and stating high tariffs on US goods, had coup d'etats respectively. Running the newly available political offices were the "Chicago Boys" and the "Berkeley Mafia". These names derived from the institutions they had graduated from and strong right wing governments emerged from the education they had received abroad. The subtle CIA indoctrination had proved successful and for many years they continued to utilize these techniques in the favor of their interests. By their interests I mean not of the US people, but rather of the large transnational corporations which have their HQ's in the US.

    Was Colombia victim to any of these methods? Are we victim to any of these today? There's always been a heavy influence from our "big brother". Looking back at our history as a country we've always been manipulated by the States, and sometimes even bullied by them into decisions that don't really benefit Colombia. On the other hand we've made it easy for them imposing very little resistance. We don't need the CIA scholarships because we walk into US colleges by ourselves. They've successfully created the illusion that anything American has a higher standard and we live with this premise still today. Did they overthrow our government at any point? No. They never had the need truthfully, and looking back we were the ones that should have thrown out or government at some point or another.

Ubiquitous: (adj) Present, appearing or found everywhere.

Idiosyncrasy: (noun) A mode of behavior or way of thought peculiar to an individual.

Mainstream Manipulation

    The world we live in, in these modern times, is characterized by the immediateness of everything around us. Media outlets are able to cover developing issues around the world in a matter of minutes and with the internet privacy is really something only of the past. Truthfully we choose to ignore it, but reading The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein has opened my eyes allowing me to observe and understand more objectively everything that happens around the world. The truth is that nothing is what it appears to be. 

    Behind everything happening around the world there always seems to be some invisible actors, the puppeteers, who manipulate and control events to the benefit of a very few. Natural disasters are exploited for economic advantages, terrorists attacks are used as excuses for fascist reforms in the legal system, and one could even say some of these events are proxies created by the government to push forward initiatives that really can only exist when the shock value is present. But what is this shock value? It's the state in which we find ourselves completely disinhibited after something very unexpected and very intense occurs. Lost and in distress we are far more easy to manipulate and the reality is people take advantage of it. 

    In Colombia, as I've seen through my personal experience, people haven't really come to understand and investigate the manipulation we are subject to. Conspiracy theories are everywhere and they are, one could say, essential because it's very important to doubt what you see. In Colombia, though, it's hard for me to come across any of these. We're a country at war but we've never really tried to understand the manipulative power the government has over us. News outlets will never come close to contradict a government statement in regards with a terrorist attack or a specific event in the conflict. Is anyone confronting the powerful oligarchy controlling Colombia's economic front? Is anyone really questioning anything other than isolated corruption cases in the government? We are, in my eyes, a successful example of a one sided population that believes everything and anything that is fed to them. If you ever get to the point of asking whether or not the armed conflict has any other underlying conditions that don't include drug money profits you're going down the wrong path. We've stereotyped the way we should think, speak, and act to the point freedom is in a gray area so do we live under this shock doctrine? Are we alienated from corporate interests in Colombia, from political power, and from the truth of the armed conflict? I don't really know and maybe I am taking a step too further, but it maybe is time to start questioning. Wake Up.

Eulogy: (noun) High praise or commendation, especially of someone who has died.

Coercion: (noun) The practice of persuading someone to do something by means of force. 

          

Beef Tongue Ad

Beef Tongue

Tiger Wood

          Thank You For Arguing brings now the very interesting topic which touches on argument through character, or as rhetoricians refer to it: ethos. Indeed, who we are or better yet who we appear to be in the eyes of our audience is key to win our argument because how we are perceived affects the response we get directly.

          We have to deal with some small audiences from time to time, and we present ourselves in certain ways to get a better acceptance as well as to get our point across in a more effective manner. Celebrities on the other hand live off their image. Who they are isn't half as important as who they appear to be or who their fan base perceives them as. Take for example Tiger Woods, the pro golfer recognized around the world for having the highest amount of PGA victories, five years ago before any controversy erupted. He earned millions of dollars a year not only through his victories, but through important ad campaigns with some of the biggest brands in sports. Woods had an impeccable utilization of decorum acting just as his audience and his sponsors wanted him to act. Professional, disciplined, talented, and honest he was an exemplary athlete. He had his audience's love. Even if this grand virtue was only rhetorical virtue, which is basically the appearance of being virtuous, his audience believed every single bit of it. This allowed him to be as successful as he was. 

          Later on some events developed that presented an important challenge to this virtue Tiger had in the eyes of his fans, and truthfully the world. His wife caught him cheating not with one, but ten different women. Not only that but she chased him out of the house with his own golf clubs, breaking the windows of his car as he rode away basically trying to save his life. The public was perplexed. They'd been tricked for many years of who this man really was and rapidly his rhetorical virtue was uncovered. His image was destroyed and he didn't have the decorum worthy of a pro golfer. His sponsors parted ways with him as the admiration and love the public had for him began to fade away. He broke rhetorical protocol and as his true character was revealed he lost the battle. There is something, though, I have to attribute to Tiger Woods. He didn't get off the rhetorical horse right away. Looking to refurbish his image he pulled out one last trick. The acclaimed tactical flaw. He wasn't an unfaithful man with horrible decision making, crooked morals, and bad taste. He was a...sex addict. With doctors to back up his claims he achieved the unthinkable. People somehow sympathized with his medical condition, if we could call it that, and he regained some of that lost virtue. 

          In the end it wasn't enough. His wife left him, taking away a big chunk of his money, and his career never really recovered from this blow. Even though it had nothing to do with golf, the scandal transcended all the way to the Green and the ball never got back in as it had done so many times before. 

Winning My Arguments

          I've had my share of arguments over the last few years. I hadn't really thought about the importance of rhetoric or how much of it was actually an active part of my life, but Thank You For Arguing definitely opened my eyes to a world I had never acknowledged.

          Rhetoric, argument, persuasion, and manipulation live amongst us. At times they work for us, but sometimes they work against us. What most of us don't realize is that much of this is under our control, but we first have to learn how to take advantage of it and exploit it. The truth of the matter is that most of the arguments I come across are there seeking a winner. It's usually a choice which involves myself and another person, because you can't really make an argument against yourself (can you?), and I don't really know if I usually win or lose. The other day I was trying to convince my mom to let me go on a trip with a few friends. It's a classic argument amongst teenagers. Her immediate response was a strong no and my initial reaction was anger and frustration. A beginners mistake, but I've learnt my lesson. That attitude just exasperated the situation and it quickly escalated into a heated debate in which the topic was no longer if I could or could not go to the trip, but rather if my tone of voice was appropriate for such a discussion. In conclusion it was a disaster. My next eristic (the name that refers to debates seeking to win a point) came shortly after that next week. Again the issue at hand was whether or not I could go on a trip with my friends, but this time there was an external variable that was there to define the outcome of our argument. I had to win my point, whether or not my grades where sufficiently good or not for me to deserve such a reward, and with my newly acquired expertise I put myself to the task of coming out victorious. I used a little concessio at first to make some point for myself. I said, "I agree mom. I could've done better overall and for next quarter I'll have my blogs on time for sure". Some more of "You're right", "I agree", etc. Then I told her we should devise a plan that would allow for less procrastination on my part and more time to spend together for both of us. That was definitely the cherry on top. 

          I managed to change her mood by showing my compromise to the cause of my academic life and that was eventually a catalyst to changing her mind. I was able to turn a menacing no into a carefully executed yes. What a masterpiece. I was proud of myself and my developing skill set, and now the only thing left was to decide whether or not to take any sunblock. That in fact was an argument with myself and lets just say that judging by the pain I am going through in my extremities it was my stubborn side the one that came out victorious.  

The Colombia Bubble

"My Colombian War" by Silvana Paternostro.

     I start off by mentioning the title because it caught my eye from the very beginning. Indeed I am Colombian and maybe I too, have a Colombian war of my own. Maybe I've never really looked around the Colombia that breaths and walks around me. So how do I see Colombia? How does the memoir portray Colombia? Is this a critique of the country I love so much, a profound analysis that delves into the back bone of violence in Colombia or the life of this person whom I've never heard about before? I can't define it as any of these really. I can only talk about it as a picture. It's her photograph of Colombia and like any photograph there are many variables that affect how it will look. The light and the exposure, the angle, and ultimately the photographers intent.

     Last year in Lit I read a poem titled "The Colonel" by Caroline Forche, which depicted a scene in which Forche visited a Latin American dictator in his beautiful home. The images portrayed in the each line were vivid and harsh, but as I continued reading I could see what she was talking about. The poem read, "Broken bottles embedded in the walls around the house" and I could immediately relate. I've seen plenty of those walls around Bogota. In fact, the buildings around where I live have electrical wiring around their walls, so all this brings the inevitable question: Who is it we're trying to keep out? Paternostro describes it as "the ladrones, the house thieves, would never be able to break into our house."(pg35) She too, like the buildings around my block, and this Latin-American dictator, lived trapped behind the iron bars of her house fearing anything strange outside. This is indeed the bubble. Our bubble, which is no different to the ones we've seen Hollywood depict in oil fields across the Middle East. We live in our country without actually living the reality of Colombia. By segregating ourselves from the crude and sad reality we are able to create the illusion that it doesn't exist. The world is sold the idea that Colombia isn't at war and we back that up because it isn't here. We don't see it and we don't feel it. So do I have my Colombia war? Indeed I do. I question the truth of the country I live in every day as many others do but I just sit in the sidelines and let it go. Whatever is going on doesn't affect me so I give my back to this country I love so much. Turning around is the challenge we all face.

     So what does my photograph of Colombia look like? I don't really have one just yet as I'am waiting for the day to clear up a bit t
o see if I can get a little more light in it.

A Slave's American Dream

    I finish Douglass's words with excitement. The narrative captured my attention all through out and it's only his lack of narration at the time of his escape that puts me down. That last chapter of his memoir was really able to present the clear transition he experienced from slave to freeman, but it doesn't just start at the end I might say. His life begins the transition as he starts his own personal empowerment. He stood out since he was a young boy for it wasn't his final get away what really cut him lose to freedom. Douglass describes how at a very young age he was able to teach himself to read and write: "Thus, after a long, tedious effort for years, I finally succeeded in learning how to write."(pg. 54) His destiny was transformed as he opened his life to opportunity. Not sitting down to wait for chances to get to him, he went out to seize them all.

    Douglass also writes about his rise against his master saying, "...I resolved to fight; and, suiting my action to the resolution, I seized Covey hard by the throat; and as I did so, I rose."(pg. 77) He was not only fighting a battle with his master but a battle with himself to gather the resolve to stand up for himself. The more this happened the closer he was to freedom no matter how far away he was from the North Star.

    The resolve and toughness he gathered during years of toil proved essential in his search for a job while living in Baltimore. He served his master well providing an income and gaining importance. All this rekindles his desire for freedom having it much closer now than ever. When he finally leaves the transformation is still ongoing. Successfully getting to a free state doesn't give Douglass the joy of freedom as he is still a slave to fear and persecution. He says, "I saw in every white man an enemy, and in almost every colored man cause for distrust."(pg. 105) This all didn't provide a sensation of freedom but more of entrapment.

    Douglass's final transformation is definitely the most moving. He comes across the idea of black man living freely under even better conditions than white men. Hardworking people living in unison under the idea of unified prosperity without the necessity of slavery. This final perception sets the stage to Douglass experiencing love with his wife and owns to the idea that hard work pays off. The whole concept of the American Dream visited from a new perspective. That of a fugitive slave full of ambition and determination.

    When he finally gets up to speak at the abolitionist assembly in front of white men is when he meets the realization of his new condition, not as a slave, but as a free man. Douglass says, "I spoke but a few moments, when I felt a degree of freedom, and said what I desired with a considerable ease."(pg. 112) Bringing closure to his struggle, Douglass sets forth the path to freedom for any slave in this world. Not only does he pose a challenge for those living in bondage alongside southern plantations, but he challenges us to ascertain our freedom and forge our own individual paths. 

Slave Conformity

    As  I continue to read Douglass's narration it leads me to understand more and more of slavery and how it sometimes works as a great reflection of society, and by society I don't mean the nineteenth century southern society. I'm referring to our twenty first century society.

    Theres a point in the narrative in which Douglass describes the slaves leisure time specially at the time of Christmas. In Douglass's words, "But by far the larger part engaged in such sports and merriments as playing ball, wrestling, running foot-races, fiddling, dancing, and drinking whiskey; and this latter mode of spending the time was by far the most agreeable to the feelings of our masters."(pg. 79) The masters wanted to dumb down their slaves by giving them this leisure time in which they didn't have to work, but instead of allowing them to do something productive they just threw some whiskey at them and watched them wreck themselves. It's a primitive, yet effective strategy to maintain that control over people. It's the master throwing the dog a bone, the mother giving her children some candy, and in this case the slaves enjoying that small sample of freedom. Most slaves conform just as most people do. Slaves lift their spirits and eliminate any thoughts of insurrection as Douglass says, "These holidays serve as conductors, or safety-valves, to carry off the rebellious spirit of enslaved humanity."(pg. 80)

    There was a book I read last year that dealt with the issue of conformity in a distopia. Brave New World by Aldous Huxley presented this place in which people were subject to profound psychological manipulation. The idea behind it all was to make everyone happy. That was the key to a harmonious society as happiness was predestined. The state promoted promiscuity and delivered a drug called "soma" to the people and this kept everyone in line. They all conformed to their lives as they were. No one strived for change or difference, just what a southern slaver would dream of. Fortunately there is always an outlier, another Douglass. Someone who finds disconformity and uneasiness where others find conformity and tranquility. Bernard, one of the central characters of the book, is different and finds troubling how society functions. Like in slavery, there was no love and no feeling. No family ties and no fathers nor mothers. You existed as you were and you were there to fulfill a specific purpose. It's intriguing to me to find so many similarities between the slave community and society in Brave New World as I'm just starting to connect these as I write.

    To finish up it's interesting to see how conformity played such a crucial role in the institution of slavery but it also brings up another question. How do we see conformity in our daily lives? Do we strive to fit in or to stand out as different? Are we slaves to social pressures and the ideas that rule modern society? Those are just some questions to ponder because to answer them would be impossible and the attempt would certainly be very time consuming.

Religious Righteousness

    Religion has always been an excuse for some of the most horrifying events in history. Don't get me wrong though, it has also helped millions. As Douglass shows us, slavery wasn't the exception to the rule. He presents some very harsh contradictions that he witnessed when he says, "...and yet that mistress and her husband would kneel every morning, and pray that God would bless them in basket and store!"(pg. 62) The slaves were starving while their masters chose not to feed them properly yet they still prayed for more? If people were discriminating black people based on their skin color could they go to the extent of finding slavery justified in religion? Apparently they did, and were very successful at it. Douglass also describes how his master gained nothing but cruelty when he first experienced religion saying, "If it had any effect on his character, it made him more cruel and hateful in all his ways; for I believe him to have been a much worse man after his conversion than before."(pg. 63) It's hard to believe that the interpretation or rather misinterpretation of an ancient text led people to such cruel extent. It's even harder to believe that the misinterpretation of ancient texts still leads people to commit the most atrocious crimes justified on religious righteousness.

"I have seen him tie up a lame young women, and whip her with a heavy cowskin upon her naked shoulders, causing the warm red blood to drip; and, in justification of the bloody deed, he would quote this passage of scripture- 'He that knoweth his master's will, and doeth it not, shall be beaten with many stripes.'"(pg. 64)

    When I think of righteousness the first thing that comes to mind is the Spanish Inquisition. There too, religion was used to justify the torture and murder of thousands of people for a period of almost 300 years. Being of different religions or choosing not to believe in Christianity was motive enough to schedule an appointment with the reaper. This violence has transcended time and religions across the world. People nowadays attach bomb suites to their bodies and walk into public places full of women and children to pursue their interpretation of the Muslim Jihad. This all has lead to the deaths of millions of people under the pretext that it is justified and maybe it's time for us to realize we're holding the book upside down. 

The Veil of Ignorance

    Education, as we've been taught our whole lives, is a tool we can use to change our lives. It defines who we are, and many times who we'll be. Reading and writing, to be more specific, are one of the most important things we'll learn to do during our school years, but they'll probably never have the significance they had for Douglass.
   
    Douglass extensively talks about how he learned to read and write in his memoir, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American SlaveI, and how this eventually shaped his life. He gives a very interesting approach to the subject as he explains how troubling it was to understand the state in which he was. Douglass says, "The more I read, the more I was led to abhor an detest my enslavers." (pg. 51) He had achieved what he had longed for so long. Able to read a whole new world was in his hands but there is a very strong contradiction between knowledge and slavery. You could say they are almost incompatible a for Douglass, the power to understand the world beyond what his eyes could see or where his captivity could take him lead way to a life change that eventually made him a free man.

"As I writhed under it, I would at times feel that learning to read had been a curse rather than a blessing."(pg. 51)

    Reading Douglass has enlightened me on the power of ignorance. If I were a slave would I want to understand the meaning behind my captivity? The history laying on my shoulders and the crude realization of my situation? Probably not as it brings forth pain and suffering rather than relief. It's the same idea behind not wanting to go to the doctor at times. I am almost a hypochondriac therefore going to the doctor is one of the most stressful situations I can find myself in. I don't want to know if I 'm terminally ill or if I'll need surgery. I choose ignorance over knowledge in those situations because at times, ignorance is blissful. This brings me to the realization that knowledge is very powerful to, more so than ignorance. Many times you'll choose to ignore it, but if you are able to manage it you'll have control over the ignorant.

The Killing of a Black Slave

    As Douglass's narration continues we're induced in a complex and gory illustration of what life behind the many times invisible chains of slavery meant for men, women, and children. Death becomes repetitive as Douglass presents different episodes in which he witnessed the brutality overseers perpetuated over disobedient slaves. Then again, disobedience is a very ambiguous term when referring to the time of slavery. In Douglass's words, "He was one of those who could torture the slightest look, word, or gesture, on the part of the slave, into impudence, and would treat it accordingly. There must be no answering back to him; no explanation was allowed a slave, showing himself to have been wrongfully accused."(34) Basically slaves were subject to their masters' and overseers' cruelty constantly so the narrative appeals to the readers sympathy when relating to the slaves and touches on anger when presenting the white folks.

    Pathos then becomes the most prominent rhetorical instrument used by Douglass. The severe injustices slaves were subjected are narrated in such a way that allows us to witness the action and at the same time stand impotent in there defense. Any attempts at justice were frowned upon, and the frequent crimes against African Americans were also ignored. If "it was worth half a cent to kill a nigger" life had no intrinsic value for they served as disposable meat fulfilling a duty any other piece of meat could do just as well.
 
    Ethos is also very important to the narrative as it adds the feeling of discrimination and racial division characteristic to this time in history. You could either be black or white and this defined everything from your most natural rights, to your every single detail in life. We see the overseers as these hard and impersonal characters that had power over hundreds of slaves only through the movement of their whips. They wouldn't rebel against any of them and disobedience was out of the question just because they were the once that could decide between life and death. The power these white figures exerted over the black slaves was almost godlike and Douglass demonstrates it thoroughly across the text.

        "They seemed to think the greatness of their masters was transferable to themselves."(33)

    The last of the rhetoric tools is harder to find but there was a great example that caught my attention. One of the prominent arguments behind killing a slave was that there usually were no witnesses even as dozens of black slaves stood to watch. "His horrid crime was not even submitted to judicial investigation. It was committed in the presence of slaves, and they of course could neither institute a suit, nor testify against him..."(36) This powerlessness slaves underwent is demonstrated strongly in Douglass's argument. They were completely invisible to the judicial system and had no hope to be free.

   As I look into the narrative and come to understand more of who Douglass was and what he experienced I can't help but wonder where he gathered the strength to flee? How did he do it and how was he so successful when he faced so little hope? The text will eventually reveal all this answers, or so I hope, but for now its all open to prediction.


    

The Emotion Behind Music

 Narrations of slavery have reigned literature since the old historical novels, that have illustrated its horrors for centuries, to the more contemporary examples in hollywood such as Amistad and Django Unchained. We see it as a clear representation of what we were once capable of but no longer do. A story of human victory that is told again and again.
   
    In Frederick Douglass's, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave, we follow the life of a boy living in a plantation and the experiences he encounters within. Violence reigns the scene as he is witness to horrible crimes committed against other slaves in the plantation. The whipping of a female slave, the continuous intimidation set forth by the master towards blacks, and the psychological warfare waged against what was thought to be the inferior mind of black slaves. One of the things that really caught my eye was the intense description of music and what it meant for them. When referring to the songs slaves chanted as running to the big house Douglass says:
       
        "They told a tale of woe which was then altogether beyond my feeble comprehension;
          they were tones loud, long, and deep; they breathed the prayer and complaint of souls
          boiling over with the bitterest anguish"(27)

    Although the songs spoke of joy and high spirits to Douglass it was clear that the feeling behind was of desperation. The meaning behind those simple words was the pure substance of what slavery was. People chanting over for they would be able to get out and see the big house. They were still captive in this haunting world but even the slightest freedoms inspired the most profound emotions.

    In music I find that similar escape. Emotion is flushed out as you relate to a songs lyrics, as the exquisite intervals mix in with an intense rhythm that is the perfect illustration of your emotions. As I've learnt while playing the guitar specific sounds are able to set an atmosphere of peace, love, melancholy, and all others. Its a medium of expression that has been around us since the paleolithic times and slavery didn't miss out in any of it. African music mixed alongside American folk songs and the stage was set for the development of new musical genres. What Douglass witnessed was the continuation of a musical ancestry that resides all over the world. That is then, how music conveys emotion. How the blues got its name and how Douglass sees the weeping souls of slavery through the lyrics of an old African American folk song.

"I am going away to the Great House Farm!
O, yea! O, yea! O!"

A Blogger's Delight

Forrest Wickman's blog or, as it should properly be called, blog post delves into the misuse of language in the world of blogging. Clearly upset, Wickman, delivers his logical argument on the preset that misusing words in the virtual world has become a commonality that has rapidly entrapped even the most famous and recognized bloggers on the web today. He highlights the idea that writing blog instead of post or any of its other alternate definitions not only confuses and troubles the reader but presents the author as a noob or a person who is ignorant to the true definition of the words that define the blogging community.

I rarely find myself as troubled and upset as Wickman with the misuse of language because truthfully, I'm constantly infringing the rules in my writing, but probably most in my speaking. This off course is no excuse, it just doesn't give me any moral grounds to judge others on their own violations. It does, though, remind me of a specific situation that has become routine in the car rides alongside my sister.

Singing along tunes is, truthfully, a very enjoyable hobby I usually practice in the car and occasionally in the shower. My memorization of song's lyrics would be categorized as average if not below average. My sister on the other hand sings along as if she wrote the lyrics word for word, not to mention she can detect even the smallest deviation from the original. Quickly she's just as annoyed and frustrated at me as Wickman is at his fellow bloggers, although I'm having just as much fun as her. Its clear then that even though Arianna Huffington misuses the word blog she enjoys writing posts just as much as Wickman and I'd go on even to say she's more successful at it. She would sound more professional if she utilized the proper word and after reading this post she probably will, but its maybe a little OCD on Wickmans part reflected by his insufferable character. Maybe its just one of his pet peeves.

I now know not to make this mistake although my emotions are still pretty mixed up on whether or not to improve my lyric memorization techniques.

It is my understanding now that this isn't a blog but rather a blog post I posted on my blog.

Slaughter House Five

Slaughter House Five
Kurt Vonnegut
Pg. 36