TOW #24

Born Bright by C. Nicole Mason is the story of an impoverished young lady made of her life. Having to deal with the disadvantages and oppression that life gave her, she was able to persevere and work hard. Being that most people do not understand the true struggle of the poor, C. Nicole Mason hopes to enlighten many with her story. She begins the story telling of the time when she attempted to be real with her audience of “do-gooders, social workers, politicians, and policy advocates” that did not really know the people they claim to help. Then throughout the story, she writes of the disadvantages she’s faced in her life. Once, when she was at a college fair trying to seize her opportunity, she was hit with the harsh realization that she hadn’t been afforded them from the beginning. “The school representatives… grew annoyed with my lack of understanding of the process and my seemingly rudimentary questions. I did not know what a major was…”. Students who go to college fairs are often expected to know the basics about college and they usually do because of where they were raised. Unfortunately, because the girl was raised, she did not have the necessary background knowledge to easily traverse the fair. Additionally, Mason details the racial tensions she experienced, especially in the classroom. When she started her school’s version of the gifted program, she felt the expectation for her not to do well. “...Black and Latino kids… were tracked out, meaning they were sent back to a remedial or otherwise less challenging learning cluster.” She saw that even though Black and Latino students were admitted into the program, they were slowly teased out. They didn’t have a chance; there was hostile environment against them. Despite this, she was able to continue to work hard a become the successful woman she is today. She turned her lemons into lemonade.

TOW #23 - The Only Way to Handle It

In 1920-1921, the United States received roughly 800,000 mostly European immigrants. Immigration rates had picked back up again after the end of World War I. During this time period, the U.S. was more desirable than ever for people wanting to improve their lives and take advantage of the opportunities the new world power had to offer. However, the massive amount of immigration caused the American government to put a limit on the number of immigrants able to enter the country. Initially, the U.S. passed the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 setting a quota where the number of people allowed to enter was 2 percent of the people of their nationality that were already in the U.S. In 1924, the Immigration Act lowered this percentage to 2 and changed the population-base numbers from the 1910 census to the those from the 1890 census. This made the amount of immigrants able to come in even smaller being that there were less European immigrants in 1890. This cartoon depicts Uncle Sam controlling the narrow opening that is allowing immigrants into the U.S. Uncle Sam is representing the U.S. and it’s government. The funnel is a visual depiction of the restriction of the number of people allowed in. At the opening of the tunnel, there are thousands of people trying to get through the funnel. However, only a few make it through the opening and into the country. The creator of this political cartoon wanted to show the unfairness of the Immigration Act and how it kept out thousands of people who wanted to improve their way of life in a similar way to the first settlers did. With this thinking, the cartoon can also serve as a criticism of American nationalism, the disapproval of “New immigrants” coming into America. Overall, the creator was able to broadcast a strong message about immigration to America in the 20s with this cartoon.

TOW #22 - "Detentions and Travel Orders"

Often times when a new president comes into power, he makes a series of off-the-bat decisions that ultimately help people rate his first 100 days as president. In his first days, President Donald Trump signed the Muslim Ban preventing people from seven predominantly Muslim countries from traveling into the U.S. Later, it was revised, dropping Iran from the list and allowing persons with visas or permanent residents from the remaining six countries to enter the U.S. In his “Detentions and Travel Orders”, Justin Sablich presents the effects of Trump’s travel ban using stories and statistics to how it is not good for the U.S.

Sablich wanted to bring to light effects of the travel ban that weren’t so obvious. Many unfortunate situations have occurred due to the travel ban. Many important Muslim figures who often travel to and from the U.S. have been stopped and unnecessarily questioned. Another incident happened with a man who had been working for the U.S. in Afghanistan for 10 years. He and his family were held for 4 days. Sablich includes these stories to exhibit the extreme inconvenience that people are feeling because of this travel ban. It has made it possible to unnecessarily question innocent people strictly because of their religion and appearance.

Because of stories like these and connotations of the Muslim Ban, international travel into the U.S. has noticeably gone down. Trump’s ban creates the belief that the U.S. is not as friendly of a nation as it is thought to be. Since most other major countries accept Syrian refugees, the U.S. having a Muslim Ban sticks out. This sore thumb has caused numbers of travel into the U.S. to go down. “Flight searches remained down about 10 percent in comparison to the same period a year earlier.” With hard statistics such as this, Sablich can appeal to logos after appealing to pathos with the stories. He mentions how large of an industry travel is and how a decrease in travel can affect the industry and potentially hurt America’s economy.

Logical facts and heart-wrenching stories allowed Sablich to show the negative effects of President Trump’s travel ban. Hopefully, some positive changes can be made going into the rest of Mr. Trump’s presidency.

Detentions and Travel Orders Coincide With Dip in Interest in Coming to America

TOW #21 - GMO, does it stay or does it have to go?

Should organisms share genes like teenagers share clothes? Genetically modified organisms (GMO) and whether they should be used as food have been long a point of controversy. Scientists take genes that can do certain things, like fight of pests, from one organism and implant into another that could reap the benefits. In principle the genetic additions are beneficial and can ward off predatory species. Conversely, GMO products can cause complications cross-contamination with wild species, new toxins, and even cancer. Despite the drawbacks, GMO, with regulation and research, should continue to be implemented in American society for their benefits.

Genetically modified organisms’ original purpose is to make things more efficient. Corn plants, popular subjects for genetic modification, are highly subject of boring by Lepidoptera larvae. However, with the insertion of the Bt gene, corn is able to make it’s own natural insecticide that keeps the larvae from damaging the corn. It is understandable to think that is a favorable alternative to external pesticides sprayed on corn crops. In the same way, some soybean crops have inserted genes that act as in-house pesticides. In 1999, when asked why they use GMO soybean seeds, farmers said, “The majority, 53 percent, said they planted them to increase yields through improved pest control. Twenty-seven percent said they used GMO soybeans to decrease pesticide costs. Another 12 percent said they used GMO soybeans to increase planting flexibility” (Duffy). The increase of production through the the improved pest control in turn lowers cost of crops, making them less costly for consumers.

Admittedly, GMO products have not been tested enough for side effects. Scientists should continue to do research into the effects of GMO products. Also genetically edited organisms have come into the picture. These organisms do not have genes inserted or removed, but rather turned off or on, just our bodies naturally do. This process is not regulated and proves to have similar beneficial effects while seeming less risky.

So whether you think gene-swapping is cool or not, GMO products should continue to be used; they’re beneficial and will continue to be with further research from scientists. GMO products have much potential to help us in many ways in the future.

Bibliography

Chang, Kenneth. "These Foods Aren't Genetically Modified but They Are 'Edited'." The New York Times. The New York Times, 09 Jan. 2017. Web. Mar. 2017. <https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/science/genetically-edited-foods-crispr.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FGenetically%2BModified%2BFood&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection>.

Duffy, Michael. "Genetically Modified (GMO) Soybeans | Integrated Crop Management." Genetically Modified (GMO) Soybeans | Integrated Crop Management. N.p., 11 Oct. 99. Web. Mar. 2017. <http://www.ipm.iastate.edu/ipm/icm/1999/10-11-1999/gmosoybeans.html>.

Smith, Jeffrey. "10 Reasons to Avoid GMOs." Institute for Responsible Technology. N.p., 15 Jan. 2017. Web. Mar. 2017. <http://responsibletechnology.org/10-reasons-to-avoid-gmos/>.