Poem

As the sun rose next morning

There was a lot of time for thinking

The day goes on 

As our struggles fill the pond

It became noon

As my thoughts were up to the moon

Many are mugged

And some are calm

You have to stay strong

Because the day is long

It's turning late 

So time to see my mate

It's time to sleep

So goodnight to all my peeps

L.A Times Poem 

Welcome to America 

Where gas prices fall

To make the economy tall

Syrians are finally free

It's time to get a Christmas tree

Cartoons are back 

And the answers to give you some slack

In Downtown L.A

There was a fire that made me say HEY

Clippers on straight nine 

While CP3 is throwing dimes

Lakers aren't on fire

So Kobe should just retire

Nuclear Power

          Nuclear power plants are a great producer of energy but can be dangerous to the human life. It provides energy for us.Although it provides energy, there is also a negative side to it. If a nuclear power fails and radiation leaks out, it is very dangerous. There has been a ton of arguments throughout time of whether to keep power plants or to get rid of them. Should we risk our lives to get more energy? Or should we stop and go back to traditional energy without the risk of dying. 

          In the article "Nuclear a Cost-Effective Energy Source" by The Washington Times says that it is a good idea. Mario Salazar explains that they provide large amounts of power at low risk. He says burning gas, oil, and coal is more risky and dangerous. There was an accident in Fukushima, United States but was proven that it was caused by massive natural occurrence. Salazar said,"We can stop viewing technologies as good or evil and instead their ability to serve us with energy source." I agree with Mario Salazar because it is dangerous to burn gas, oil, and coal but nuclear power plants are also very dangerous. If a nuclear power fails, the radiation spreading through the air is very deadly. If people are not affected by it immediately, their kids with have disorders and might suffer a hard life or death.

          The article "The Truth about Nuclear Power" by Veronique de Rugy, explains what people think of nuclear power plants and what they actually mean. "Nuclear power is a cheap alternative to fossil fuels." It is not. Building a nuclear power plant in the United States has cost, on average, three times as was originally estimated. It is very expensive to build one power plant. "Risk is the main problem with nuclear power plant." Risk does play a huge factor in power plants but the real problem is the cost. Nuclear power plant doesn't kill people on yearly basis, only under serious and lethal circumstances. "The spread of nuclear power has stalled in the U.S due to a hostile regulatory environment." No, the nuclear power has stalled because it is simply not profitable. Although people may think nuclear power plants are very deadly, the real major problem of them are the cost.

          Nuclear power plants are very dangerous and cost effective. People are living in nuclear waste in the present day. It also cost  lot more than what people think it would. The radiation from the power plants and seriously cause illness to people or kill them. Just because we use power plants, it does not mean we are going to stop using oil or fossil fuel. Having cheaper alternatives such as wind turbines or solar panels are a better way or producing electricity.  

1-26-15

Descriptive Essay: Winter Essay

 

 

          My winter break didn't consist of many things. It was nice to have a three week break from

 school. I went to Seattle for about a week. I also got to watch two movies over the break and played

 a lot of basketball. Although we I didn't do too much, it was still a nice and relaxing break for me.

 I didn't have to worry about what is due tomorrow for homework or do I have and tests to study for.

 I had time to think about other stuff than school. Sleeping was an issue to me though. My sleep

 schedule was thrown off. I would sleep at two in the morning and wake up at 6 or 7.


          It was nice to see my father and sister again over the break. My father works in Seattle and comes about once every other month. So for Christmas, my mom, sister, and I went to Seattle. We also have cousins who lived there, so we just stayed at their place. It was very cold to our family but to my cousins, they said it was there normal weather. It was nice smell the fresh air in the morning when I wake up and the warmth from the fire place made me very relaxed. When we were at Seattle, we saw parades and went to sky zone. Sky zone is a place where a giant warehouse is filled with trampolines and you just jump around. I was very tired after only thirty minutes of jumping. We stayed till the 30th of December and drove back. Although we drove back to Los Angeles, when we went to Seattle, we took the plane. I rarely fly on the plane so going in the air was very enjoyable.


          I had a basketball tournament before I went to Seattle. There was three games in that tournament. We won the first two but unfortunately at the championship game, we lost to Poly High School. I played a lot of basketball before and after I went to Seattle. When I played basketball with my friends, we would go at six or seven in the morning. We would stay till about twelve or one, eat, then go back and play again till eight or nine. Since I played basketball basically the whole, I didn't have anything else to do.


          Coming back to school wasn't my favorite thing. Although people have complained about waking up early for school, it hasn't affected me too much because I would wake up at six in the morning. I watched two movies during the break, one of the funniest and scariest movies in my opinion. I also watched my favorite show on Netflix from season one to season ten. It was quite cold in LA too. I wasn't expecting the weather to be like that. After I came back from Seattle I was hoping to come back to warmer weather but it was basically the same. Overall I had a fun and relaxing break with a lot of basketball. I wish I went out more and do other stuff but it was still great.

01-15-15

On Civil Disobedience: An Interview with Howard Zinn 

-Cihan Aksan and Jon Balles, P.219,225

          Howard Zinn was part of the working-class family in Brooklyn. He was part of the army and flew bombing missions in World War II. After that, he became a professer at Spelman College in Atlanta. The school were for black women and that is where he got involved with civil rights movement. He collaborated with Staughton Lynd and a student named Alice Walker. He was fired for insubordination related to his protest work in 1963. He wrote a book "A People's History of the United States" and it presented American history through the eyes of those he feels are outside of the political and economic establishment. He did an interview about civil disobedience and it was published on the State of Nature website.

          "State of Nature is quartely online journal of the Left. Its focus is on world of politics, global economics, history, philosophy, social theory and arts." (Zinn, P. 219)  It stands opposed to the imperialist ambitions of the world's great powers and capitalist economic order. The commitment to the development of protest movement to the development of protest movements and the construction of a radical alternative is very high. "They aim to publish essays, interviews, commentaries, reviews, poetry and photography that inspire progressive thoughts, unite dissenting voices, and dispel the myths of the world order." (Zinn. P.219)  The website stated "Howard Zinn is a professor emeritus at Boston University. He is a historian, activist and social critic and has written many books including 'A People's History of the United States'. This interview was conducted via email with SoN editors Cihan Aksan and John Bailes in January 2007." (States of Nature, P.220) 

          State of Nature asked Zinn, "What methods do you find at our disposal today? And what limits does your imagination impose upon them?" Zinn simply said "Direct action means acting directly on the object of your protest. We see it in strikes both historically and today, which are a form of direct action against corporations that, for instance, exploit their employees, or manufacture war weapons. Another way of direct action is non-violent action, including forms of sabotage. Groups begin invading companies that made weaponry, and committed minor acts of sabotage to protest the actions of these companies. People take actions themselves is what Zinn is trying to say. Workers go on strikes to let everyone know what is happening. They sometimes go in their work and do stuff that will show the process and hopefully send a message.

          The interviewers said, "You find in history many instances of submission to authority even in the face of terrible instance, and very few of rebellion. Why do people submit so readily to injustice?" (P.226, SoN) "Two reasons" says Howard Zinn. "One is that they do not recognize it as injustice. A young person submits to the exhortation to join the military without recognition to join the military without recognizing that he or she may go to war which cannot be morally justified."(Zinn, 226) This means that people will do something just cause they think they have too. He also said, "People will submit to an injustice because they feel they have no alternative, that if they refuse they will be punished. They must because people say that they have been taught to respect and trust- the President, their minister, even their family- may tell them they must because they owe something to the government." (Howard Zinn, 226) People don't understand why they are doing something. They feel like it is the right thing to do. If they are told something and there is a small reason of why they should do it, they will. That is why Howard Zinn says the problem is not civil disobedience, but civil obedience.

          Albert Camus, who is part of the State of Nature asks, "Can non-violent direct action ever be as effective as revolution once was in history? Zinn starts by saying, "We must first question the effectiveness of violent resolution ." The United States superseded the British ruling class with a local ruling class, the French Revolution led to Napoleonic dictatorship, Russian Revolution let to Stalinism. He said "In South Africa, we saw a basically non-violent resolution by blacks ends Apartheid. "Although it didn't solve all the problems, it solved a fundamental problem without massive violence. "He concludes his answer by saying "No Revolution, violent or non-violent, solves problems completely, but non-violent revolutions avoid the horrors of war and move a step in the direction of justice." (Zinn, 227)

          During the interviews, Howard Zinn was asked a series of questions. I believe the State of Nature members have found their answers. Howard Zinn answered every question to the best of his ability. in the end we know that he believes in civil obedience, not civil disobedience. That people will take actions in their own hands and go on strikes and riots. They will go to their workplaces and sabotage the place. Finally that Revolution does not solve the problem completely. Non-violent revolutions, although has a more positive ending and moves toward justification.