EMMA GOLDMAN, ALEADING CHARACTER IN A PATRIOTIC ERA

CHARACTER ANALYSIS: EMMA GOLDMAN

Emma Goldman previously called “the most dangerous woman in America” and now one of the most famous heroines of the history of liberal democracy. She was a great orator and a gifted writer who sacrificed her life for her ideals. She is considered one of the strongest leaders of Anarchism and her activities have had enduring effect on anarchist political theory, women’s rights, radicalism, birth control and etc (wikipedia.com).
She was born June 27, 1869 in Kovno, Lithuania, later Russian Empire (answers.com). The anti-Semitism wave made her Jewish family to migrate to the United States. Young Emma who was encountered with inequality, violence and poverty in Russia faced labor force dissatisfaction and worker union strikes in America. By the time capitalism and thrusts had become leading economic forces and the labor unions were struggling to be born to defend the work force rights who were from the lowest and weakest layers of the society (wikipedia.com). Emma, as a poor girl of an immigrant family worked as a seamster and was engaged and influenced by the events. Emma Goldman lived in a critical period of the western history. Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, Spanish civil war, Fascism, Nazism and World War I in international scope and Capitalism, Red Scare, First wave of feminism with the women suffrage movement labor unions inside America. (about.com, wikipedia.com)
Emma’s mother was a happily married woman with two daughters Helena and Elena when her husband died. She then entered a family made marriage with Abraham Goldman. A poor unsuccessful worker, with a bad temper, who hoped for a boy and believed that a girl would be another sign of failure (wikipedia.com). However, Emma was born as his first child. And three sons followed. He punished his children and above all Emma who was the most rebellious. After sometimes studying at school she was deprived to continue as she was a girl and according to her father “girls do not have to learn much! All a Jewish daughter needs to know is how to prepare gefilte fish, cut noodles fine, and give the man plenty of children” (wikipedia, Goldman,living p12). So Emma, fond of study, started studying for herself both books and events around her. Among them tow were very much inspiring. One was a novel named “what is to be done?” by Nikolai Chernyshevsky. The other was studying the Nihilists responsible for assassinating Alexander II of Russia. Unhappy atmosphere and poverty of the family and witnessing the society as a place for inequality and violence beside the revolutionary movements and schools of thought all helped forming her mind (wikipedia.com).
In 1885, she migrated with her sister, Helena, to the United States just to be followed by her other members of family the year after. Her family had to escape the anti-Semitism waves which were growing in Russia. They settled in Rochester, New York and she started working in a factory. After sometimes she married but separated soon. Once, she returned to her husband but couldn’t endure. This time, her family calling her “loose” rejected her and she went to New York. There she met Alexander Berkman and Johann Most, tow leaders of the Anarchism. Berkman became her life long friend and lover and Most taught her methods of oratory and public speaking. She very soon founded her base of thought as an Anarshist and gradually became a powerful orator talking for the public of her revolutionary ideas (wikipedia.com).
They believed in direct effort in making reforms or stimulating workers to revolt. The first and most important effort was the plan to assassinate Henry Clay Frick. Frick was the factory manager for the Carnegie Steel Company and a fierce opponent of the labor union. Emma and Berkman decided that by killing him they can stimulate the workers to revolt against the Capitalism. Berkman did the deed and Emma stood behind to explain the motives for the people. However, the attempt was unsuccessful and Frick, though injured, stayed alive. Berkman was captured and sentenced to twenty tow years prison. To their bad luck, workers and anarchists both condemned the action (wikipedia.com).
Emma Goldman finally gets arrested for her activities. In prison she reads many books including medicine and the works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, novelist Nathaniel Hawthorne, poet Walt Whitman and philosopher John Stuart Mill. After release, she traveled to Europe to follow her favorite fields in nursing. She met anarchist leaders and hold lectures as well during the time. In 1899, Goldman returned to US, met Hippolyte Havel, an anarchist leader and began a relationship with him. They went to France together and founded the International Anarchist Congress in Paris (wikipedia.com).
In 1901 she was mistakenly put under persecution for President McKinley’s assassination (about.com, Jewish Women Association). The person who did it though admitting her separation of the issue but had said that by taking part in one of her lectures on anarchism had decided to do so. By the time she had become an absolute unpleasant figure for the American government. “Meanwhile, socialism gained support over anarchism among US radicals” (wikipedia.com) and Theodore Roosevelt informed of his decision to suppress anarchists. Therefore, Emma decided to side from her activities for a while and by using the false name of E.G. Smith took on some private nursing jobs (about.com, JWA).

At the time of World War I and the second term of President Woodrow Wilson, the Selective Service Act of 1917 which obligated all men of 21 to 30 to go to war was passed. Goldman saw it as a “militarist aggression driven by capitalism”. Although the war seemed to be for democracy, in reality it was “the imperialist venture fought on behalf of capitalists at the expense of working class and all those who were oppressed” (about.com, JWA). She was imprisoned then under Espionage Act. When she was released the red scare was the horrible issue of the country. Many of the ordinary or important people were deported on the claim that they worked for the communist party or had some communist leanings. Goldman married Jacob Kershner to obtain legal citizenship. But the government by using the Anarchist Exclusion Act deported both Goldman and Berkman with hundreds of other Russians to Russia. Unexpectedly the tow were disillusioned with the dogma of the Bolshevik regime, so left the country and finally reached to Berlin were they lived for several years. There she started writing in the New York World which later became tow books, “My disillusionment in Russia” (1923) and “My further disillusionment in Russia” (1924).
Emma Goldman suffered a stroke on Feb. 17, 1940. The great orator became unable to utter a word. Finally, she died in May 14 in Toronto, Canada. The US naturalization and immigration service allowed her body to be brought back to US. She is buried in Chicago among those who were executed after the Hay Market affair (wikipedia.com).
Emma Goldman was a real anarchist, rejecting the orthodoxy and fundamentalist thinking.

She was influenced by Emerson, Chernyshevsky, Wollstonecraft and Nietche. Anarchism was central to her world view. “Anarchism then really stands for the liberation of human mind from the dominion of religion, the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property, Liberation from the shackles and restraints of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth. An order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life according to individual desires, tastes and inclinations” (wikipedia.com).
She also, believed in the absolute destruction of the State to gain absolute freedom (about.com).
On the other hand, she believed that capitalism was inimical to human liberty. As it is after more wealth so more power will be gained to exploit and enslave (about.com).
She is one of the opponents of the marriage. “How much sorrow, misery, humiliation … men and women grown under the iron yoke of our marriage institution and there seems to be no relief, no way out of it.” She believed that women must be independent from all the bondages and try for their individual progress. Despite her liberal views she was not an advocate of women suffrage in the first wave of feminism. She believed that women issue must be solved fundamentally and just gaining suffrage is a means not to count women as equal to men but to conceal the way laws are passed and put into action (about.com).
Emma Goldman was a revolutionist who suffered much for her ideals. Despite her disadvantage to reach to her goals while alive, she was able to put her mark on the history of human being. This paper is not to judge her anyway, but what she tried for, being considered an anti-religion and anti-value at her time, is now praised for as the liberal rights of human being.
Her publications are:

Founded the journal of Mother Earth in1906.

Anarchism and Other Essays. New York: Mother Earth Publishing Association, 1910.
The Social Significance of the Modern Drama. Boston: Gorham Press, 1914.
My Disillusionment in Russia. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Page and Co., 1923.
My Further Disillusionment in Russia. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Page and Co., 1924.
Living My Life. New York: Knopf, 1931.
Voltairine de Cleyre. Berkeley Heights, N.J.: Oriole Press, 1932.

SCHEMA

Schemas are “idea’s, images and theories which might be negative, positive or relatively neutral” as John Bowen says in his paper, Anti-Americanism as Schemas and Diacritics in France and Indonesia. Schemas are different according to national, geographical, political, historical, and religious and all the features which are influential in forming people’s minds. They might be universal, national or regional. (Bowen)
According to Bowen, different people have different or even contradictory schemas in mind. They may be positive, negative or neutral and current events can change them or bring some of them into salience.
Worldweb.princton.edu defines Schema as “an international representation of the world, an organization of the concepts and actions that can be revised by new information about the world”.
America as a country with universal influence has got a variety of schemas in the universal or national scales. Power, technology, liberalism, individualism and pluralism are some of the universal schemas about America. In the national scales, in France for example, it is famous for liberalism, economic imperialism and especially among French Muslims, Jewish media control, as Bowen says. In recent years, after attacking Iraq and America’s unlimited support for Israel, negative schemas have gained salience among Muslims. War, conspiracy and anti-Islamism are among them.
In Iran, regarding the history of United States’ meddling with the internal affairs and its backing Iraq in the eight year war against Iran, negative schemas have been so dominant. Expansionist, exploitative, pro-Israel, anti-Islam are some of them, besides other ideas which could be considered positive or neutral exist as well. Among them are words such as economic and military power, technology and science.
I asked some students in the University of Tehran and Olum Tahghighat to write down the first three words that come to their minds hearing the word “America”. Let’s have a glance at the answers.

Age 23, MA French literature:
Democracy, Oil, freedom of thought and speech

Age 26, PhD Geomorphology:
Superpower, Nuclear power, Oppression

Age 24, MA Environment Designing
Gray, Undisciplined, Crowded, Expansive

Age 24, MA Educational Management
Iraq, Bush, Lie

Age 24, MA Adult Education
War, Power, Science

Age 24, MA City Designing
Ambiguity, Multiple Ethnicities, Scare

Age 23, MSC Accountancy
Welfare, Oppression, Economy

Age 24, Electronic Engineering
Offence, Science, Obama

Age 25, PhD Philosophy
Multiple Ethnicities, Technology, Humanism

Age 25, PhD Biology

Multilateral strength, Modernism, Expansion

US JUDICIARY INDIPENDANT?

Judiciary is one of the key organs of governance in each country. In the United States it works side by side of legislative and executive powers. But the critical and sensitive roles and duties of the judiciary highlights the significance of some necessities in treating it. In order to conserve fairness of the decisions and unbiased interpretation of constitution, judiciary is best suitable to be independent from the other tow organs or any other force that potentially can lead it to the wrong side. In some countries courts are the instrument of the executive system meaning the specific party ideology and philosophy and most probably the individuals are highly influential in the judiciary system. Thus the courts decisions which ought to be fair and unbiased ultimately get biased by partisan demands. In the United States from the beginning it is tried constitutionally to keep the judiciary as independent as possible.
“Article three of the United States constitution establishes the federal courts as part of the federal government” (wikipedia.com). Federal judges are chosen by the president for life term. They are removed from the post either by death, resignation or impeachment. However, by now only thirteen judges are impeached by the congress. On the other hand it falls to the chance of a president to face vacancies in his term. Some have had no chance like Jimmy Carter and some surprisingly had appointed four judges like President Reagan.
Supreme Court as the highest rank of judiciary is mostly engaged with determining acts and laws to be constitutional. It can easily declare any act in every branch of government, unconstitutional (APS). However, this can be returned by constitutional amendments, something that happens rarely. Another way that congress can interfere or in some sense control judiciary based on constitution is that congress can regulate the “size and administration of federal machinery of justice” (APS, 255). President on the other hand controls judiciary by appointments and his influence on public or congress. The latter is done by motivating the opposition or support for a particular issue. These mild safeguards seem necessary but still do not threaten the judiciary’s independence. One other factor which must be taken care of to keep it independent is the job security. Their salaries should be high enough to prevent bribes; furthermore, it should not be dependant on the executive power in order to ban partisan pressures. On the other hand judges must be trained to ethically stay aside and decide on the truth and based on constitution and previous laws.
As we see judiciary system in the United States is an independent system coordinating with the other branches. There are some moderators designed in constitution in the structure of executive and legislative branches which keep the judiciary still in relation and in line with them. But the overall system is intended to be independent.

THE PATRIOT

The film is supposed to be historical melodrama about the American Revolution. It’s the story of a South Carolina planter who is the veteran of French-Indian war, named Benjamin Martin. He is a widow with seven children who intends to stay aside from the revolution wars. When Colonel William Tavington, from the British army kills his son in front of his eyes, Benjamin attempts to revenge and free his other son who is going to be hanged. Leading a group in his fighting, he becomes famous as “the ghost”.
The film ends with the victory of Americans and gives good tidings for hope of a better society of their own.

The Hollywood criteria seem to override the history. The black issue that is shown as a positive happy life in the southern America seems dramatic rather than reality. The British are shown as the pure evil and the Americans as the good righteous guys who are brutally and cruelly treated. On the other hand the title, “The patriot” seems unsuitable as Benjamin Martin primarily did not take part in the war for his country but to revenge his Thomas’ death and to save Gabriel. However, Gabriel can be called a real patriot. From the beginning he takes parts in the wars, even after he’s injured.
However, too long and a bit boring, the special features, good acting and the historical setting of South America make it worthy to watch. What’s more, there are too much of brutality and violence shown in the movie adding to the unpleasant face depicted of the Britons.

The term “patriot”, best suits the necessities and the situation of the now- America. From the revolution till today, Americans have not developed nationalist feelings but patriotism. As we see at the end of the film, a house is being built in a new land. And people intend to live together in the hope of a better life in a new made structure.

FILM REVIEW: THE GREAT DEBATERS

“THE GREAT DEBATERS” is a film on black issue set in the 1930s at Marshal, Texas where surrendered as the last city after the civil war, as James Farmer Jr. says. (1) It’s the story of a team of four, leading by professor Melvin Tolson in the small Wiley College who try to prove black equality in the time of “Jim Crow laws, lynch mobs and …the great depression” of Texas. (2) A young, black, debate team who finally succeeds to win the Harvard debate. The team is consisted of “Henry lowe, a handsome, clean-cut youth with a lurking bad-boy streak, Hamilton Burgess, a dutiful, eager, beaver…, Samantha Booke, a straight-laced, aspiring –would be-lawyer and a soft-edged proto-feminist, and finally James Farmer jr, a preachers son whose father keeps him on a tight lash”. (3) The leader of the team, professor Tolson, happens to be a recognized African-American poet with political leanings who organizes the National Sharecroppers Union working for both poor whites and blacks whose ‘servitude is the same’.(4)
Although the dominant theme is progress and change, it is highly concerned with racism. The characters face lynching mobs who had killed and were burning the body of a black, Dr. Tolson was under restrictions by the Sheriff for his political activities and many other signs of black segregation and inequality in the liberal democrat society of America. However, the team brings forth issues like Gandhi, World wars, justice and law to make the context more humanitarian. The concepts repeating in different senses several times are “an unjust law is no law at all” (a paraphrase of Augustine of Hippo) (5) and “doing what you ‘have to do’ in order that we ‘can do’ what we ‘want to do’.” (6) According to Denzel Washington, the director and the actor for Dr. Tolson, “It is not a film about ‘racism in Texas in 1935. It’s what these young people did about it … to overcome whatever obstacles were in their way… It’s the story of hope rather than race’.” (7)
Based on a true story, the real character of James Farmer jr, became a civil rights movement leader in 1950s-60s and founded the congress of Racial Equality. Samantha Books also became an aspiring lawyer. (8)

The director of the film, is the Oscar winner Denzel Washington, born in 1954, New York. He has acted in 51 movies starting with Wilma (1977) and the last which is still in production, “Inside Man2” (2010). He also has produced four movies and directed “the great debaters” (2007) and “Antowne Fisher” (2002). (9)

The writer of the film is Rbert Eisele, born in 1948, California. With tow wins and four nominations he has written 15 movies among them “Breach of contract” (1982) and “Hurricane season” (2009), produced 7 including “Last night” (1993) and “Resurrection blvd” (2000) acted in 2. Eisele had taught acting and playwriting at the Rio Hondo College in Whittier. (10)

The producer of the film is Oprah Winfrey who “rose from poverty and a troubled youth to become the most powerful and influential woman in television. She is a recognized talk show hostess, producer and actor”. (11)

The Great Debaters
Theatrical release poster
Directed by
Denzel Washington
Produced by
Oprah WinfreyJoe RothBob WeinsteinHarvey Weinstein
Written by
Jeffrey PorroRobert Eisele
Starring
Denzel Washington

Forest Whitaker

Nate Parker

Denzel Whitaker

Jurnee Smollett
Music by
James Newton Howard
Cinematography
Philippe Rousselot
Editing by
Hughes Winborne
Studio
Harpo Productions
Distributed by
Metro-Goldwyn-MayerThe Weinstein Company
Release date(s)
December 25, 2007
Running time
126 min.
Country
United States
Language
English
Budget
$15 million
Gross revenue
$30,236,407

1)www.imdb.com/title/tt0427309
2)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/the-great-debaters
3)http://movies.nytimes.com/2007/12/25/movies/25deba.html
4)http://rogerebet.suntimes.com
5)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/the-great-debaters
6)ibid
7)www.npr.org
8)http://movies.nytimes.com
9)www.imdb.com/name/nmoooo243
10)www.imdb.com/name/nmo2519351
11)http://movie.nytimes.com
Production details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/the-great-debaters

CONGRESS VS PRESIDENT

In the history of American governance there has been a competence between the legislative and executive powers. Imperial presidency and imperial congress are coined in his occasion. For example at the end of Vietnam War, congress tried to practice a stronger control and limitation on the White House. Micro-managing the domestic and foreign policies, committees to impose rules and regulations and refusing presidents appointees on ideological grounds were among congress’ attempts. (McKay,CAPS 55).
Constitutionally congress is appointed to maintain all the legislative power, declare wars and ratify treaties and finally, specifically senate is empowered to ratify treatise and approve appointments by the president (McKayAPS 129-130).
In the latter case for example, congress rejected largely the president’s appointees on ideological or partisan reasons. In case of committees in 1950s, the McCarthy committee, famous as the red-baiter, went too far to recognize the communist figures not only in government but in the national scene. In recent years the senate select committee on campaign practices, earning national attention for its inquiries in the Watergate scandal. In 1987, the Reagan administration was investigated for Iran-contra affair. In this case the executive branch had unilaterally entered a process which needed congress’ approval. Again there has been an investigation on President Clinton and his wife’s involvement in Whitewater property Company. In recent years congress has claimed executive privilege to certain information, however on no clear constitutional status.
Congress also uses impeachments on the executive officials. Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton were the presidents who were impeached but not convicted; however, Nixon resigned before impeachment.
Historically the first congressional investigation took place in 1792, on the disastrous expedition led by General Arthur st. Clair against Shawnee and Miami Indians in which 657 American troops were killed (answeres.com/topic/congressional-investigations).
During 19th cent congressional investigations on Civil War, Ku Klux Klan, purchase of Alaska, some rail road scandals like Credit Mobilier took place. In 1923, investigations on Teapot Dome scandal sent the secretary of interior of President Harding in prison and discredited his administration. As mentioned before, Watergate, Sam Ervin, McCarthy and Wall Street investigations are among the most important congressional attempts to limit the government.

CAPS: controversies in American politics and society by David McKay

APS:American politics and society by David Mckay

ASSIMILATING IMMIGRANTS

Huntington is the latest and highest profile critic of Latino migration. He believes that they will make America to a bifurcated country. This paper tries to reject his idea.
America is a country with mass migration. Each wave of migration during history has changed its culture. Experience shows that all the previous groups were finally assimilated to the new context however entering parts of their own culture to it. So American culture, as Huntington believes, is not a homogenous pure Anglo-protestant culture to be worried about in this new wave of Latino migration.
A historical survey shows this fact. For example, Scotch-Irish fit well into Huntington’s Anglo-Saxon model but the black slaves did not though converting to Protestantism.
Two million Irish immigrated to the United States in the 1840s, making ten percent of the whole population. Up to the 20th century they had remained in their enclaves but had also gained political power. They entered economy through public jobs. And finally JFK became the president. The assimilation process itself had made America partly Irish. Irish cop, Roman Catholic churches and St. Patrick’s Day became norms of the society.
Jews also made a wave of immigration to US after World War II; their Talmudic tradition led to a strong educational ethos helping their fast progress. They retailed trade in clothing and many other commodities, invented Hollywood and largely became teachers. Pop culture, literature, American politics; all were affected largely by Jews. They moved fast to the managerial and ownership positions. After all,the full assimilation for all groups took 80 to 100 years.
The new wave are Hispanics mostly Mexicans. The long border offers many illegal and legal crossing. Though the case this time is a bit different as they go to the service and labor jobs and their cultural and linguistic factors are largely entering the American culture, Americans shouldn’t worry as it is not a new procedure. In the past the same happened with the other waves of immigration but finally they were assimilated in the American culture.
On the other hand France has had little success in assimilating the massive Muslim immigration from Maghrib. Certainly the French did not allow their culture to adapt to these new-comers. France has to allow a major and continuing cultural exception or adapt its own culture. The current scarves-ban in public schools shows that French cannot tolerate other identities harming their secularism. The French policy also didn’t allow Muslims to enter the economic mainstream. It seems that France is moving in the opposite direction for the assimilation.
Finally, America provides the best headstock for assimilation as it is itself open to change. This flexible status has made new definitions and identities. Therefore, migration and immigration not only is not a crisis to America, according to his paper, but is the element of its elasticity, dynamism and continuity. These dual adaptations is necessary for assimilation and if a country likes France claiming to be the most democrat of the Europe does not adopt this rule will certainly lose.
However, still there's a big questionmark in front of the word "IDENTITY". Can this new American identity without any roots firm in the ground of history, culture, religion ... last for too long? Can it answer the essential inner needs of people it is protecting?
considering the case for Iran, as a country in which religion and ancient-deep culture are dominant, can we expect this kind of free adaptation to the other cultures? of course it is not possible in a large scale but we should prepare the ground to adapt the new and necessary elements in our established frameworks.

Assimilating Immigrants by Robert Levine

AMERICA, ISLAM,IDENTITY,EUROPE

IDENTITY AND MIGRATION (an abstract)
BY FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
PROSPECT MAGAZINE

Hobbes and Locke argue that human beings possess natural rights as individuals in the state of nature, rights that can only be secured through a social contract that prevents one individual’s pursuit of self-interest from harming others. Modern liberalism arose in good measure in reaction to the wars of religion that raged in Europe following Reformation. Liberalism’s principle was religious toleration and the modern liberalism’s principle was that state power should not be used to impose religious belief on individuals. The freedom protected is for individual’s cultural or religious or ethnic identities.
Taylor points out that modern identity are inherently political because it demands recognition. Contemporary multiculturalism and identity politics were in many ways born in Canada. It is under stood not just as the tolerances of cultural diversity but as the demand for legal recognition of the rights of racial, religious or cultural groups.
The radical Islamist ideology that has motivated terror attacks over the past decades must be seen in large measures the manifestation of modern identity politics rather than of traditional Muslim culture. Oliver Roy declares that radical Islamism has emerged because Islam has become “deterritorialised” in such a way as to throw open the whole question of Muslim identity. Despite Islam’s doctrinal universality, traditional religiosity is not universalistic. Immigrating to Europe, one’s identity as a Muslim is no longer supported by the outside society. According to Roy a “protestantisation” of Muslim belief occurs, meaning salvation in a subjective state that is at odds with one’s outward behavior.
Interestingly, the second and third generations of European Muslims turn to radical Islamism as a form of identity, because, stuck between tow cultures with which they can not identify they find a strong appeal in the universalist ideology of contemporary jihadism.
The problem of jihadist terrorism will not be solved by bringing democracy and modernism to the Middle East. So many terrorists were radicalized in the democratic European countries. In the Muslim world more contact with democracy increases, not dampen the terror problem in the short run.
Modern liberal European and north American societies have weak identities. American identity was always political In nature with a dominant Anglo protestant culture. However there are some unpleasant aspects in it i.e. consumerism, Hollywood’s emphasis on sex and violence and the underclass gang culture.
Most European countries tend to conceive of multiculturalism as a framework for coexistence of separate cultures rather than a transitional mechanism for integrating new comers into a dominant culture. On the other hand, some contemporary Muslim countries are making demand for group rights that simply can not be squared with liberal principles of individual equality.
Asking Muslims to give up group rights is more difficult in Europe than US. As the former still develop communal rights and fail to separate state and church decisively. In these countries national identity is experienced in a way that makes a barrier for the newcomers with different ethnicity and religion. a
Raziyeh Kharidar

By the way, American life is full of religious ceremonies and rituals helping the process of assimilation.
The rise of relativism has made it harder for postmodern people to assert positive values and therefore the kinds of shared beliefs that they demand of migrants as a condition for citizenship. Postmodern elites, particularly those in Europe, feel that they have evolved beyond identities defined by religion and nation and have arrived at a superior place.
My question is according to the above is Islam a problematic spot in the process of the postmodern liberal world? If Muslims due to strict social laws are hard to assimilate in the western liberal democracy, why Jews having the same condition in their own kind do assimilate? What’s more why it should be compulsory for the world to assimilate in this universal liberal democracy? What if for a religion like Islam whose religion and politics are inseparable otherwise it gets valueless? It seems that even in America the absolute liberalism is not performed, as Anglo Protestantism is obviously the core for assimilation.
The paradox is if in a world, itself tied to the dualities, a group for the sake of freedom can make another group stop practicing its beliefs. Is that absolute liberalism possible at all? Will we face a gradual or sudden decline of liberalism in the near future as the world watched the downfall of communism?

ETHNIC CONFLICT THEORY

From the perspective of conflict theory, competition among ethnic groups increases in the process of societal change, thus creating the conditions for ethnic conflict and exploitation rather than assimilation. Powerful ethnic groups exclude the weak ones from the wealth, power and priviledge that come with societl change.
Ethnic competition is the mutually opposed efforts of ethnic (or racial) groups to secure the same objectives. On the other hand, ethnic conflict is a form of rivalry in which groups try to injure one another in some way. Its reason is ethnic stratification, meaning a form of rivalry in which powerful ethnic groups limit the access of subordinate groups to societal resources, including wealth, power and priviledge. Competition, conflict and stratification are dimentions of ethnic change. As ethnicity is an evolving or emergent phenomenon.
Considering Marxism, ethnic conflict is transformed into economic class conflict in the modern state. Powerful, racial and ethnic groups force weaker ones into compulsory labour, thus changing the character of the conflict into struggle between economic classes. However, the social Darwinism argues by analogy, that social evolution is the struggle for survival between racial and nationality groups, and the course of this struggle the more powerful groups naturally dominate the weaker races(ethnic stratification).
By the 20th century the emerging social psychology prefered to see humankind as a bundle of propensities, triggered bybthe social environment, rather than a fixed product of biology.
Ethnic relations in a society can be either hierarchial or parallel. If parallel, there's little ethnic inequality but with a hierarchy of groups, access to wealth, power and privillage is determined in part by ethnicity. With industrial capitalism a complex division of labor and greater opportunity, ethnic relations became competative and the result is conflict.
By the way, four patterns of minority adjustment have been identified. First, an immigrant group suffer economic hard ship at the bottom of hierarchy but give way to gradual acceptance and mobility.
Second, some go directly to the nations better jobs. Third, the entrapment of immigrant labor at the bottom and last, immigrants who erect an ethnic subeconomy or enclve.
Mastery over force comes ultimately from the monopolization of the means of production or the control over land, labor and capital in the creation of surplus wealth. Minority groups can also turn into the corporate core in their rivalry with the majority.
However, the functional theory of conflict answers in the affirmative and proposes that conflict can unite groups in a society and will not necessarily drive them further apart. This theory applies to realistic conflicts which arise from frustration of specific demands within the relationship and from estimates of gains of the participants and which are directed at the presumed frustrating object.
Ethnic conflict theories are critical of both assimilationism and pluralism, by implication. It sees strife, struggle and the oppression of the weak by the powerful.

American identity papers

Class instructions

One of the thought worthy phenomenon in the American society is voluntary association. "The term voluntary association, ie , a private, member ship –based organization in which membership is non-compulsory". (H K Anheier, Socialogy of volunteer association).
Historically, one of the biggest early examples is "broad postal system in 1830s"(questia.com). The first burst of voluntary work was "before the civil war, 1820s to 1830s", mostly on morality and slavery. The next was after the civil the war, 1870s well into the 20th century as responses to industrialism and economic crisis. (questia.com)What's interesting is that about four fifth of the extensive associations ever found still exist today. (Ibid)
"Classical sociological thought saw voluntary associations as an indicator of social evolution in the development of undifferentiated to differentiated societies"(A K Anheier).
Modern thought on this issue began with De Tocqueville's "democracy in America". In modern democratic societies voluntary associations have tow functions: first, bring diverse back grounds on a common purpose and second, building a sphere between political center of power and the electorate, avoiding the tyranny of the majority(Ibid).
Mellissa Miller in her paper, "How local, translocal and national voluntary organizations promote democracy" indicates that "scholars since Tocqueville had argued that voluntary groups taught American the 'art of association' in ways that benefited democracy". She uses the American citizen participation study (p5) to bring some interesting statistics on the issue. Accordingly women in local scale make higher and in national scale an equal percentage to men in voluntary associations. Whites considerably higher than non-whites as the former 84% in local and national scales and the latter occupy just 16%. Apart from statistics, voluntary works are well-known, familiar and effective in American society. This might be a result of American individualism which makes a culture of non-dependence on government in solving all the problems. Although, whatever the reasons and roots, voluntary work seems a good and admired trend both as a help and critic to the government.
Considering our Islamic teachings and the cultural background in Iran, voluntary works and associations can be extremely effective and helpful. But why these voluntary associations do not exist in Iran. Is it some burucratic system that makes everything hard? Or is it lack of self confidence in overall public who don't feel able to make any change individually?
Studying the pros and cons of these associations, it seems worth to undergo a deep study and let volunteers to do their contributions on public good like religion, culture, environment, education and etc.

THE AMERICAN IDENTITY

To define identity, we should answer the question of "who are we?" do we define it by referring to our religion? Nationality? Ethnicity? Race? Gender? Or etc. However, what has gained significance in terms of identity in the modern era is "nation-state".

Due to the ideological questions brought by modernism and post-modernism and the new circumstances of living regarding mass migration and expansion of communications, "identity" has turned to one of the most challenging issues of the day. However, the problem is much deeper for America. As America is basically shaped through migrations and immigrations, there's no classic bondage to form one identity for it.
There are three major theories to explain American identity. First the melting pot, the traditional view that different people would come to the scene of America and get absorbs in its whole. This theory is rejected as many people did not match themselves with the mainstream. Second, is the salad bar. Here, multiculturalism gets possible but the continuity of unity is endangered. Finally, the stew is proposed. In this theory all the particulars exist but the compound exists as well.

By the way, Huntington in his book "WHO ARE WE?" says that the basis for American identity has been 1) Christianity (protestant ethics), 2) Anglo-Saxon laws, 3) good opportunity for everybody. He believes that immigration that has brought people from around the world to America is weakening these primary elements which once were the founding reasons for the formation of America.

Weisskirch in his paper, "Ethnicity and perceptions of being a typical American…" says that "the view of who are an American and what is considered American is rapidly evolving". By referring to Citrin, Reingold, & Green, he explains that the national identity of American emerges because of the perceived commonalities of the members that there are some unique characteristics in being American, regardless of origin". According to Dr. Hosseini, there is an "American Idea" to which great commitment is hold and forms the core elements of American nation.

THE CANADIAN JOURNALIST

Dr. Zafar Bangash, the journalist and the director of "The Crescent", the Canadian newspaper was our guest in FWS. He's a Muslim anti-Zionist journalist who is writing and criticizing by Islamic ideology for three decades. What he discussed to us was mostly about Canadian attitude toward its Muslim citizens and Muslims on the whole.
"Canada is dependent on US economically and militarily" he expressed,"90% of Canadian export is to US that's about 8 to 9 hundred million dollars". He said that at the moment, the extreme right wing conservatives have the power, whose attitude towards Muslims and military actions is even harsher than George Bush. Despite 55 to 60% of people's disagreement with Canada's sending soldiers to Afghanistan, the government does so. On the other hand there are troops in Iraq and government holds strong support for Israel. For example, the government's reaction is hypocritical toward Canadian citizens being killed in Afghanistan and Lebanon. Also, Canada was the first to cut off aid to Palestinians when Hamas won the election of 2006. At the end Dr. Bangash believed that Muslim countries like Iran "should establish good relations with Muslim communities in other countries".

AMERICAN INDIVIDUALISM IN CYBERSPACE

Internet is a universally used device which has many strong potentialities like changing the centuries- old ways of thought and patterns of communication. Worldwide relationships inevitably convey many new meanings and reflections to the lives of people. In this between, America, as the dominator of the cyberspace, exports its culture effectively. One important aspect which is held by the help of inherent characteristics of the cyber space itself is individualism.
Individualism is a modern concept referring to "societies with a loosely knit social framework, where the interests of the individuals usually prevail over the interests of the group"(Tapanesa, Smith, White. Cultural diversity in online learning. Sciencedirect.com). As McKay says in "American politics and society", "it is rooted in pluralism". Meaning there's no special ideological, ethnic, religious or linguistic, in whole collectivist prejudice in a society and all of them are accepted beside each other. This situation is contrary to the collectivism. In such societies "individuals are integrated into strong and cohesive groups based on protection and loyalty"(Tapanesa… Cultural diversity…).as a matter of fact, according to McKay, "individualism is the best thing to represent Americanism". It is one of the most fundamental traits of American identity as this society is basically founded on diverse ethnic, cultural, linguistic and etc groups. Formally, they all are equal before the law and make one united whole.

Internet is one of the tools conducting individualism. However, nowadays, most of the people of the world share the cyber space; it's United States that still dominates this network. Its search engines, famous news, scientific and many other sites belong to U.S. As a result internet with millions of viewers everyday is a great tool for cultural export. American goods, books, movies, stars, models and etc are advertised in universally famous sites. All these will the American way of thought, part of which is individualism.
People need to interact with the world and the fastest, easiest way is using internet. It doesn't matter how collectivist they be, they have to face the diverse cultures ways of thought and as a matter of fact have to respect all in the interactions if they all are the citizens of a united cyber space with the ultimate levels of diversity. So, in this way, individualism enters the lives of people from eastern or western collectivist countries. According to Geert Lovint in "Mass psychology of the net: A proposal", when internet began to serve the public, " postmodern theory spread the rumor that there were no longer crowds, only micro units, communities and most of all, scattered individuals, trying to define their own uniqueness, each of them dealing with their own psycho specialties. The social sciences and humanities followed the 'lonely crowed' in their spasmodic attempts to differentiate themselves"(139-140).
At the end, internet is one of the most effective tools to convey individualism as an inseparable part of American identity to the old world whose culture is mostly collectivist. The reason is that as an American invention, it's still dominated by them both in hard and soft wares. On the other hand, interaction with people via internet, automatically leads to a sense of individualism.

MINORITIES DEVELOP A MINORITY MENTALITY

Imam Abdol Alim Musa is a black man who has been directing an Islamic movement, A'Sabiqun, in America for 30 years.
We were happy to meet him at the faculty of world studies, last week. He had a very interesting story about his life when he told us that he had been one of the biggest and richest drug dealers in his youth. Hopeless of getting what he has been after, he gets interested in Islam, leaves all the treasures behind and starts an Islamic movement.
Imam Musa spoke to us of many different issues about American society, blacks, Islam and etc. he talked about the black ancestors who were captured from Africa and transported to U.S. Then, their everything, meaning their culture, language, religion and whole being was taken from them. They even were not given true information about their African history. What blacks knew was that Africa was an undeveloped land with uncivilized people whom whites have been savored.
"Human being acts according to self image" he said, "until recently we never reached our full potential as we didn't have a full image". As a result there were no true answer to the question of WHO AM I?" for the blacks. They were brought up by the mentality of colonization. By the away, he believes that their Fitrat still exists and helps them to find the true answer. "if you want to rest your people, it's not to improve their physical conditions but to make a good image of them", Imam Musa recommended, referring to God saying, "I’m TO THE BELIEVER WHAT HE EXPECTS FROM ME". As a result, "Islam is accepted as a transformation in black community" he declared. By accepting Islam, the answer to the big question "who am I?", changes, so the image changes."Minorities develop a minority mentality" he expressed referring to the minority Shia and Iran who have been able to stand firm against the enemies by the help of Allah. Sabiqun is a minority group as well which has been wonderfully successful to survive despite being the target of American government for past 30 years.

This is my second week in the faculty of world studies and I'm mixed up with the heavy body of tasks. These days "globalization", "analytic approach to history" and "vital issue of difference in American ethnicities are discussed.
Globalization, for example, is the controversial issue which has faced extremist approaches. There we discussed that its causes are far-fetched as it is a multi-disciplinary phenomenon which needs deep and analytic knowledges of many sorts. It's results as though more observable, are more readily prone to discussion. The three waves of globalization, its discourses, from equalizing it with Americanization to a new colonization were taught and finally Iranians point of view about it was argued.

History, actually is a narrative, expressed Dr. Hoseini in the history course. Narratives are subjective, that's why the history books have different approaches according to the conditions of th their own time. For example, American histories of the 17th cent. are religious, 18th cent. are secular and 19th cent. are in a metropolitan atmosphere. History is not the knowledge of the past but for the present and future. people learn from it but what they take depends on how they look to it. In fact, there are several theories on the case. One is linear, a process starting from one point and coming to an end in another particular one. The other is cyclical, in that there's a paradigm shift after acertain period of time. The third is the Pendulum. The base, in this case, is fixed but the pendulum moves to the down left, then to the balanced point and then the down right, or vice versa and this continues.According to the third theory, from Ronessance to the 20th cent., there's a paradigm shift. Accordingly, people move from the old world to the new world(America), but interestingly this shift has changed its way and the 21th cent. is the time when the new world moves to the far east of the old world, meaning east Asia.
"Identity", a word that people needed not to hezitate, in the past, to define. However, it has turned to be one of the most controversial issues of the world, especially for America. America for its diverse ethnicities, cultures and religions needs to define a new identity different from what was common in the past to save its unity.
These were the gists of what we were taught and a lot of papers and research are left on our shoulders to be done as soon as possible.

"THE POET OF BRILLIANT WATERS"

on 29th of September 2009, we had the opportunity to meet the American poet and writer, Dr. Christopher Merill, on the faculty of world studies. He "directs the international writing program at the university of Iowa"* and has recieved awards from the Academy of American poets for "Brilliant waters" and "Watch fire"**
Gladly, he was so touched with the Iranians' habit of honoring the guests and felt coming back home while visiting the tomb of the king of ghazal, Hafez, at Shiraz.
There, a friendly meeting was held and the students posed diverse questions from civil and foreign policies of the U.S. to its culture and literature, although, he insisted that he's there just as poet and writer.
Dr. merill believed that "literature is a good field to know Americans". The diversity of ethnicities in U.S. is an important issue that not only is reflected in the works of famous writers but also the giants of American literature are themselves from different ethnicities. These help the diversity to be brought under the flag of unity. "Writers responded to the condition of own time" he believed.
To answer a question about 9/11 and its aftermats for the Islamic world, he said that "it's easier to be afraid of it than to do something about it" as the reason for Islamophobia spread through America at the time.
Dr. Christopher Merill, as an American literary man who is interested in the elitist world while living with the mass in the heart of society, believed that the slogan of change,introduced by president Obama, brought hopes but can not expect to happen in a short period of time. He expressed that media and writers should do their job in realizing the idea.
At the end he admitted to share his classes in Iowa via vidio conference with the faculty of world studies.


*&** : http://www.christophermerillbooks.com/