Blog Feed

Upon beginning this paper I had a very set idea for what I wanted to write about, the war within oneself. Yet, during the peer editing process I determined that I would need to narrow my thesis in order to stray from sounding vague. My final thesis involved the consideration of PTSD acting as a war in a veterans mind long after they have exited the battlefield. I must admit that at first I felt very uninspired concerning the general topics of this paper. However, the more research I did, the more engaged I became. The development of my larger idea was not done in a premeditated fashion, it developed over the course of my writing. This was most satisfying to me, the fact that I didn’t have to search for a larger idea, on the contrary it came to me.

Picture this, a black and white image depicting a close up of an older man. His face is the focus in the image. Crinkles surround tightly shut eyes. His mouth seems to be pursed due to creases, yet it is hard to tell because of his white beard, which traces across his upper lip and down to his chin, crawling up either side of his face. The eyebrows of the old man are knit together, forming an indentation in the space between. The old man appears to be recalling something in his mind unknown to the viewer. The memory does not appear to be a pleasant one due to his expression, the mixture of a wince and a grimace. This man is a veteran. When veterans come home from war there are many issues a previous soldier can face: problems with the VA, homelessness, yet those who never served in the army fail to consider the war that wages beyond the battlefield long after the battle is over.

In PBS’s interview Moral Wounds of War, a soldier's experience is referenced as following “For some, unless they get called back the war is over. For others, it’s only begun.” This so called war which is referenced throughout the article is otherwise known as PTSD. PTSD is the main cause for much of the trouble that follows a vet. Violent outbreaks, a symptom of this disorder, can land many in jail.  Other futures for vets with PTSD hold homelessness, prosecution, and suicide. Many have guilt in relation to events which occurred during combat. The absence of god is another aspect that many question.  This source held many bits of statistical evidence to support my topic, as well as a relevance that opened doors to new perspectives.

When a soldier exits the battlefield it is expected that the war is finally over. However PTSD is an ongoing, raging battle that can affect many veterans long after the war is over. Mike from the veteran panel is an example of this effect. It was not necessarily that he came right out and said “I have PTSD”, it was more like the underlying tone he carried when referring to himself.  Whenever Mike mentioned his skill it was never in the light of benefit or value but in the sense of spastic failures. To be at war with yourself doesn’t mean you have ever had to experience the likes of war. It is more of a state of being.  Having low-self esteem, something that leaves people with the emotions of being a consistent failure and carrying a lot of guilt due to that whether there is truth to it or not.  

“I like to talk about the moral emotions of war, and they include wounds, but they’re the hard, bad feelings that may erode at your character.” Said professor Nancy Sherman from Georgetown University. War is not only physical but mental too and it is something that needs to be realized.

After writing this essay it has changed my view on war but I also think the whole unit did that as well. I knew what war was but I didn't really know what war meant. I knew that war was two or more groups of people fighting because they had two different viewpoints on a problem. I thought it ended there. I didn't know what war meant to those who fought in the war. I didn't know what happened to them,. Physically, mentally or emotionally. Now I have a different viewpoint on war.

You are fighting a war in a foreign country.  You are thousands of miles away from your wife and two kids.  You think about them everyday.  You imagine the beauty of your wife and you see the kids in the backyard playing with the dog. You are fighting this war just to get back to them safely and you’re family prays for the same thing.  They miss you and all they want is for you to come back home in one piece. Then you hear shots fired and you awake from your dream. The enemy performed a surprise attack at your base, bullets are being shot in the air and fly inches from your head.   At the end of the battle you see your best friend dead.  He grew up with you in the same town.  He went to your high school.  You guys won the state championship together.  He was the one who kept you sane in a place of constant violence.  Now he lies lifeless on the ground and you lose it.  When he died to took something with him that you can’t really explain.  This changes you for the rest of your life.  You see the image of his body on the ground for the rest of your life and you will never be able to escape it.

War is not something that is new to the United States.  The United States has been fighting a war over 90% of the time that we have been a country.  As a country we seem to be in love in the idea of war.  War has been an essential part of our identity since our founding fathers signed the declaration of independence.  We took one of the most powerful country at the time for our independence and won.  Since then we have had the mentality that if we don’t agree with something that the first option is war and that we will eventually win.  That we have the responsibility to fight for those who can’t fight for themselves.  While this is a noble cause, what we don’t realize is that not only are we hurting and killing the people we are fighting but we are slowing hurting and killing those who we send overseas to fight for us.

Some veterans are affected by Post-traumatic stress disorder.  According to the Mayo Clinic, Post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD is “a mental health condition that’s triggered by a terrifying event - either experiencing it or witnessing it.  Symptoms may include flashbacks, nightmares, mood disorders and severe anxiety, as well as uncontrollable thoughts about the event.”  These events can include being in war or seeing death.  Many war veterans come back from deployment with this.  According to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, up to 20% of veterans that served in Operations Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Enduring Freedom (OEF) has been diagnosed with PTSD at one point.  About 12% of veterans from the Gulf War has diagnosed with PTSD.  During Vietnam it is estimated that 30% of Vietnam Vets had PTSD in their lifetime.

So what happens in the brain when someone has PTSD?   Viatcheslav Wlassoff, PHD, who is a writter for BrainBlogger.com said “Understanding how PTSD alters brain chemistry is critical to empathize with the condition of the victims and devise treatment methods that will enable them to live fully and fulfill their true potential.”   After studies of the brains of PTSD patients researchers have a little more understanding on what plays a role in the brain.   There are three big parts of the brain that plays a major role in PTSD.  The parts are the amygdala, hippocampus, and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex.  In the first region, the hippocampus, PTSD patients show a reduction in the volume in this area.  The hippocampus is the part of the brain that is responsible for memory functions.  It helps a certain person to create new memories and retrieve them for a later time when in a relevant environment.  This part of the brain also allows us to tell the difference between past and present memories.  With this reduced volume in the hippocampus, people with PTSD can not tell the difference past and present experiences.  The second region is the ventromedial prefrontal cortex.  This is the region of the brain that is responsible for regulating emotional responses triggered by the amygdala.  PTSD patients also show a decrease in the volume of this area which explains the why people who suffer from PTSD exhibit fear, anxiety and extreme stress.  The last region of the brain is the amygdala.  In this region, patients show hyperactivity in response to stimuli that are connected to the individual traumatic experience of the patient.

War veterans who are diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder also could have a higher rate of suicide.  According to the U.S Department of Veterans Affairs, going through a traumatic experience can increase a person’s suicide risk. Veterans Affairs said “Studies show that suicide risk is higher in persons with PTSD. Some studies link suicide risk in those with PTSD to distressing trauma memories, anger, and poor control of impulses. Further, suicide risk is higher for those with PTSD who have certain styles of coping with stress, such as not expressing feelings.”  Since we know more about PTSD, there are better treatments available.  Treatments like cognitive behavioral therapy, which allows those affected by PTSD to understand and change how they think about their trauma.  Or exposure therapy.  The goal of exposure therapy is to help control your thoughts and feelings.  Therapy along with medication like antidepressants can help people affected by PTSD to live a more normal life.

So how can we prevent this?  How can we lower the amount of veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder?  How can we lower the amount of veteran suicides because of PTSD?   I believe that we can end this by not seeing war as the only solution to a problem.  But can we stop doing this?  One day in my English class we had two Vietnam War.  The names of the veterans were Mike and John.  They were from the Veterans For Peace chapter in Philadelphia.  After a very interesting presentation,  I was able to ask one of the veterans a question.  I asked “Can you imagine a society rooted in nonviolence?”  The veteran looked at me for a minute as I waited for a response.  He said “ I think I can but if that were to happen if would have to start from the ground up.  We as citizens would need to take a stand.”  We need to see war for what it is and break up with it.  Not only is war hurting the brains of soldiers but it is also driving some to the point of wanting to take their own life.  Once we can take a stand together as one, that is we can finally start the healing process of the thousands and thousands of men and women who were willing to die to protect their friends, family and country.

Works Sited

"PTSD: National Center for PTSD." Mental Health Effects of Serving in Afghanistan and Iraq -. U.S Department of Veterans Affairs, n.d. Web. 13 Mar. 2016. <http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/PTSD-overview/reintegration/overview-mental-health-effects.asp>

"PTSD: National Center for PTSD." Treatment of PTSD. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

<http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/treatment/therapy-med/treatment-ptsd.asp>

"PTSD: National Center for PTSD." Suicide and PTSD. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

<http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/problems/ptsd-suicide.asp>

"America Has Been At War 93% of the Time – 222 Out of 239 Years – Since 1776." Washingtons Blog. Washingtons Blog, n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

<http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/america-war-93-time-222-239-years-since-1776.html>

"Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)." Mayo Clinic. Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

<http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/post-traumatic-stress-disorder/basics/definition/con-20022540>

"PTSD: National Center for PTSD." How Common Is PTSD? -. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

<http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/PTSD-overview/basics/how-common-is-ptsd.asp>

Wlassoff, Viatcheslav, PhD. "How Does Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Change the Brain?" Brain Blogger How Does PostTraumatic Stress Disorder Change the Brain Comments. Global Neuroscience Initiative Foundation (GNIF), n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016. <http://brainblogger.com/2015/01/24/how-does-post-traumatic-stress-disorder-change-the-brain/>

At the beginning of writing this paper I was struggling with what I should focus on as my main question. When looking back at my annotated bibliography I found that I really liked the third image that I chose to describe. I decided to use that description to help form my wider question. That gave me my goal, which was to be able to connect all of my ideas to that one picture description. Like always I wanted to write something that I was proud of as well as something that I thought covered my thoughts on how war and violence affect people, based on environment and situation. I think that I could make this a stronger piece by including more sources that I had in my annotated bibliography. I only focused on two and it would be much stronger with more evidence.

“And just as a cancer patient must at times ingest a poison to fight off a disease, so there are times in a society when we must ingest the poison of war to survive. But what we must understand is that just as the disease can kill us, so can the poison,” Chris Hedges.  People who believe that war and violence are the only solutions to things seem to turn a blind eye to what comes with them. Lives are always lost, and I don’t just mean casualties. War changes people, the experiences that come along with battle are not easily forgotten, as we learned from the Vietnam veterans who came in. Men who weren’t in actual physical battle have and live with survival guilt. Like with some sort of cure, the side effects of war are glossed over and it is forgotten that real people with very real lives were involved, not robots and not ghosts. For many people involved in a war, there is this feeling of a loss of time. This is one “side effect” of war. It is not only the loss of lives but the loss of time spent with family and friends. War messes with these men's minds, yet it seems that for many, if they pretend that these soldiers are problemless than in their eyes they actually are.

There is an image in black and white of a little girl who looks like she’s walking towards something passed the camera. She has her right hand up. Behind her are the wreckage of some buildings. They look like they are on the verge of collapse and there is debris everywhere. A crane is reaching towards the top of one of the buildings but it looks old and not strong. Something bad obviously happened here. Either an explosion or some type of bombing. There’s a woman slightly farther back than the girl who is looking at the little girl and looks like she’s trying to say something to her. Possibly telling her to come back or something along those lines. There is also a man standing in the background just looking at the girl. This image shows how violence blinds people from things that really matter. It is a perfect example of the overlooked and forgotten side effects of war and violence. Those buildings could’ve been that woman and child’s home, or her school. That little girl will always have this image in embedded in her mind and it will most certainly be more real than just viewing the picture.

People's environments affect how they act. It’s like how if you grew up in a city, you’re used to the city, but if you grew up in the suburbs you’re used to the suburbs. When you are put into an environment that you’re not used to, you never know how you’re going to react or what kind of person you’ll turn into. Like in the book, The Things They Carried by Tim O’Brien. One of the men, Azar, always talks about killing and death. He’s not afraid of it, and it’s more than a fascination. He enjoys it. If Azar was not brought to Vietnam, I think that he would be a very different person but since this is the only setting we see him in, this is the only version of Azar that we get. When another member of the platoon, Kiowa, died, all of the men searched for his body. During this time Azar kept making jokes about Kiowas situation that the other men didn’t find amusing. They were jokes that you didn’t make about someone who just died. Once they found Kiowa's body, Azar’s comments completely changed, he apologized and took back all of the jokes he previously had said. You can see how war makes people react to different situations in certain ways and if Azar was not in the Vietnam war he wouldn’t make these jokes. In a way, they are a type of coping mechanism.

War and violence numbs its creators and the people that are roped into it. It makes humans forget what really matters. It’s like a drug, dulling human's thought process and emotions. I think it’s important for people to realize this. Important for the people who are directly affected by war and violence but also to the people who do not realize that it is not only these people's faults. It is also the fault of the higher ups, the people who couldn’t care less about the men and women that are sent to fight wars that for some, they don’t even believe in. The same people who are putting their lives on the line just to please someone who has more power are not given what they need to live as good of a life as possible after their experiences. Even after the fighting and the violence is over, for many, the war still rages on in their heads.

Work Cited

"Interview: Chris Hedges." Interview. Religions and Ethics Newsweekly 31 Jan. 2003. PBS. Web. 21 Mar. 2016. <http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/2003/01/31/january-31-2003-interview-chris-hedges/13987/>.

O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried. New York: Broadway, 1998. Print.

Agunya, 15 (On the right), teaches his little brother Mumbri, 13 (On the left) how to load and aim a semi-automatic weapon after finding their entire family slaughtered by an Angolan terrorist group. “Eu quero matar cada governante Angolano que vejo…” I want to kill every Angolan official I see. Mumbri’s life changed forever after this moment…

Experiencing the annihilation of loved ones changes you in all aspects of life. The feelings of hatred, ignorance, sadness, and reminiscing all brewed together is a recipe for disaster in the streets of Chicago and in the battlefields of Angola. To experience the same tragedy Agunya and Mumbri have and not want to retaliate with the same force or more, takes a very noble and conscientious being. German psychological scientist, Mario Gollwitzer conducted a study where people were partnered up with another person anonymously in different rooms. The partners were asked a series of trivia questions and for every question they got right, they’d win tickets. At the end, the scientist divided the tickets up evenly but told partner #1 that that partner #2 opted to take all of the tickets. The scientist gave the partner #1 the chance to either opt to take all the tickets or split them after finding out what partner #2 decided to do. 60% decided they wanted all of the tickets because partner #2 wasn’t planning on sharing. That same 60% decided to write  notes to their anonymous partners all with smart comments like “You didn’t want to split the tickets so I’m be selfish back and take all of the tickets for myself.” This experiment showed that when people feel unappreciated, retaliation  is a very technique used as an attempt to restore that feeling of appreciation. Agunya and Mumbri suffer from a feeling not being valued. The fact that their family was slaughtered and no one answered for it will evoke this feeling. So as a result of this, the two brothers are on the hunt to retaliate with the same amount or more force to restore that feeling of mattering. Retaliating also provides them with the opportunity to make the Angolans feel the pain that they feel or worst; which is also a desired goal.

Experiencing the annihilation of loved ones changes you in all aspects of life. This change is physical, emotional and most of all mental. The feelings of hatred, ignorance, sadness, and reminiscing all brewed together is a recipe for disaster in the streets of Chicago and in the battlefields of Angola. Martin Luther King once said “As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked, and rightfully so, “What about war?” They asked if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.” This quote addresses the most important reason people become numb to violence in mass numbers. To know that policeman and soldiers are awarded medals like distinguished shooters badge, and expert rifleman badges on a consistent basis for honestly killing people brings a sort of positive vibe to violence as a whole. So for a kid in Chicago to murder someone who sells drugs in his neighborhood and be prosecuted for it, is really hypocritical. He eliminated someone that was a threat to the well-being of his community. Isn’t that the same thing soldiers do and police officers do? Yes it is.

I focused on war literature for this paper. I wanted to explore the different facets of war literature and also the importance of war literature. During the research process I read a couple of interesting articles that really informed and shaped my opinion on the importance of war literature. The peer review process was especially helpful for this essay because I was initially unsure of what I wanted my larger idea to be. It was difficult to find a specific focus for this essay but I am proud of the final result.

Two children stand in front of a tank. The eldest, a girl a of about nine or ten with short black hair, carries her little brother, who cannot be more than three years old, on her back and they both look directly at the camera. They seem to be standing in a hot desert so they both wear loose light clothing. The tank seems to be going the same direction in which they are walking. We can picture this war scene clearly in our minds through this description in words. Even though we can never truly understand what it’s like to be in the midst of a war unless we have actually experienced it, words, stories, and pictures can help us begin to understand. In his essay titled, “The Extremes of Conflict in Literature: Violence, Homicide, and War”, Joseph Carroll says:

Literature depicts such emotions, evokes them, and makes them available to readers, who experience them vicariously.

To help others understand the horrible truth of war, authors like Tim O’Brien, Kurt Vonnegut, and Ernest Hemingway write novels about the subject. Like Carroll says, this literature allows readers to experience emotions that they’d never have the opportunity to experience otherwise. In experiencing those feelings they begin to understand the emotions of those who have been involved in war.  They begin to understand what it is like to know that at any second you could die and they begin to understand what loss of human life really means. The literature of war not only aims to foster understanding of war, it also attempts to argue for peace. Kate Scheel, a professor of English studies writes:

War literature…warns against pursuing armed conflict, exposes its atrocities, and argues for peace. It records the acts of war with as much accuracy as is possible, and it memorializes the dead. It is voyeuristic, exploitative, and sadistic; it is also tender, selfless, and comforting. It is gleeful and angry; inflammatory and cathartic; propagandist, passionate, and clinical. It is funny and sad.

Good war literature forces us to experience the emotion of war and inspires us to believe that there are other options. Good war literature exposes the truth and explains to us why it is necessary to find alternatives to violence. It reveals the atrocities that occur during war and it reminds us why human life is something to be valued and cherished.

War literature creates a complex relationship between author and reader. Because of the subject readers expect a certain degree of truthfulness in war literature. In this case we expect truthfulness to mean reality; we expect that everything that the author writes actually happened. As readers we expect honesty and loyalty. In The Things They Carried, by Tim O’Brien, we are led to believe that the story and all the characters are real but halfway through the book O’Brien reveals that all the stories and characters are fictitious. Through that experience we learn that truthfulness doesn’t have to mean reality. O’Brien states:

A thing may happen and be a total lie; another thing may not happen and be truer than the truth.

Meaning that even though something doesn’t actually happen it doesn’t mean it’s not true. What is more important when it comes to the truth is the emotion and sentiment behind it. So, even though we feel betrayed when we learn that the events in The Things They Carried did not actually happen our relationship with the author eventually emerges stronger at the end of the book when we come to the realization that when it comes to truth we need to look beyond the surface, look past the superficial details, and examine the things that really matter. War literature reminds us that life, death, and emotion are more important than small, insignificant details.

War literature is necessary. Not only because it helps civilians understand war but also because it helps soldiers deal with their experiences. Soldiers need to be able to express themselves somehow and they need to be able to write the truth of what they experience. Soldiers need to know that somebody cares enough to read their stories and maybe even take action. War literature is one of the most important methods for understanding war and violence. Candid accounts of what really happens during war through novels explain exactly what happens during war and also deliver these explanations in a medium that is accessible and interesting to most people. War literature needs to be something that everybody is familiar with. It’s easy to ignore violence and human weakness. We need war literature to remind us of all the problems in the world. We need it to inspire us to action and to hold us accountable for the needless loss of life that war brings. War literature is essential to any push for anti war mentality.  It is the proof that war is evil. If we ever want to live in a society that does not depend of war, militarism, and violence as solutions we must ensure that everyone reads and understands war literature so they understand the truth of war.

Scheel, Kate. "Violence and the Literature of War." N.p., Spring 2004. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

Carroll, Joseph. "The Extremes of Conflict in Literature: Violence, Homicide, and War." The Extremes of Conflict in Literature: Violence, Homicide, and War. N.p., 22 Mar. 2012. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried: A Work of Fiction. New York: Broadway, 1998. Print.

The goal of this essay is to argue and stress the importance of what it means for survivors of violent trauma, specifically soldiers and war veterans, to share their stories and memories pertaining to the trauma that they have experienced. Initially, I wanted to do research and investigate the effects of holding onto important memories or stories and not sharing them, or in other words, secrets. However, I came to realize that that was more along the lines of a research paper vs. an essay with a controversial thesis, so as I shifted my focus to survivors of violent trauma, I was able to contextualize my thesis better and take a new route for this essay. A wide variety of sources are included to form a full view of this issue.

*

The human memory is extremely complex. It stores an infinite amount of moments, events, emotions, and more. Essentially, those are all of the elements of a story that is waiting to be told. That’s all memories really are, anyway: stories. As always in the case of stories, it is up to the person to decide whether or not they are willing to share them or not. No matter the circumstances, this always remains true. This conscious decision draws the line between secret and visibility. We keep secrets for many reasons. However, in the world that we live in today, it is not always easy for us to share the hard stories- those stories that have affected us on the deepest of levels, that rein ever present in our lives. This becomes even more true when we focus on the struggles survivors of violent trauma from warfare are forced to face. When their stories can’t be told, it only causes them more difficulties when it comes to their mental and even physical health. Survivors of trauma need to be able to have an outlet to comfortably share their stories, in a way that is best fit for them. It is all of our jobs to listen to them and to provide them with the proper resources for them to do this.

Dr. James Pennebaker, a psychology professor and researcher, once created an experiment to test if writing about traumatic experiences and feelings reduced the amount of times the patients seeked extra help. In an article written by Eric Jaffe, he says it included  “...a concentration camp survivor who had seen babies tossed from a second-floor orphanage window” and “...a Vietnam veteran who once shot a female fighter in the leg, had sex with her, then cut her throat.” Additionally, he says that “In one study of 50 students, those who revealed both a secret and their feelings visited the health center significantly fewer times in the ensuing six months than other students who had written about a generic topic, or those who had only revealed the secret and not the emotions surrounding it.” Even just being able to write down the experience and the emotions and feelings surrounding them were helpful to these people. It caused them to feel more at peace with themselves, and feel less of a need to reach out for help from the health center. That just goes to show how vital it is for their to be outlets for survivors of trauma to reveal their stories.

Sharing stories or experiences doesn’t always have to mean it is between two people. Powerful moments can happen between a person and the God that they look up to. For example, there is a somewhat popular image on the internet that shows a Russian soldier from World War II about to go into battle. He is looking downward, staring into space. He holds a cross between his fingers, and holds that same hand up to his mouth. The man is praying, it seems. In this moment he is speaking to his God. The man behind him is passionately yelling something, but that is not what he is focussed on. This is a moment of intimacy, the last quiet moment before this man enters a battle that may cost him his own life. However, he does not seem angry, or have a hard look on his face. It actually appears as though the corner of his mouth is turned up into a bit of a smile, and the corner of his eye seems soft. He is finding peace and solace within his God. The soldier holding the cross may very well be scared deep down inside, but he is accepting the circumstances and preparing himself as he must. For some people, it is merely a God whom they must open themselves up to.

Sometimes, depending on availability, veterans will get involved in programs that will allow them to share their own war stories to groups of people. Mike Felker, a veteran of the Vietnam War, is one of those people. In one of his presentations, he mentioned someone from the war who was called Big Man, and attached a short story he wrote about his experience with him. In it, he says, “I tried to pray and beg him back to life. By this time another patrol had come to the side of the cliff. Chuck, a hospital corpsman from the Third Platoon saw my hysteria, that my frantic efforts were futile. He shook me hard and slapped me when I started crying that Big Man was alive. I stopped, comprehending finally he was dead… I watched, as I will always watch, until he disappeared.” It is saddening to realize how emotionally and mentally scarring this must still be for him to recall. However, it is clear that being involved in a program where he can tell this story, and share his writings about the story, is helpful to him.

It is quite the hardship to experience trauma on such a grand scale and to have so many stories to share with no means to share them. Without some sort of outlet for those experiencing or those who have experienced violent trauma to share their most powerful stories from their memories, they may face a whole host of other mental, and sometimes even physical illnesses. This is why it is important that we listen to these people, that we provide for them the programs and resources in which they can feel comfortable sharing their deepest, darkest, and most difficult secrets or experiences. Everyone should be able to take what is in their minds and release it to the world in some way, shape, or form that is comfortable and safe for themselves.

Works Cited

"Feature Story: Writing to Heal: Research Shows Writing about Emotional Experiences Can Have Tangible Health Benefits." Feature Story: Writing to Heal: Research Shows Writing about Emotional Experiences Can Have Tangible Health Benefits. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

"Mike Felker's Writing." Mike Felker's Writing. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

I can honestly say this Advanced Essay has been the most challenging one of the four we have received in this English class this year. Starting off the unit, I couldn't really get into the book we were reading because I just wasn't interested in it and when it was announced we were to do another advanced essay for our benchmark this quarter, that made me feel even worse about everything. I didn't know what I wanted my paper to be based off on at first, I was going in the direction of story-telling and the affects that had on people until I realized that was more of a personal piece. So, I finally came to conclusion of wanting to surround my paper on the media and with the help of my peers and Mr. Block, I am satisfied with what I produced. My goals were to have a clear, concise and controversial thesis which the reader could thoroughly understand which I do feel I've accomplished. I feel as though teens would be able to relate to this paper the most simply because we are living in the generation where media is booming.

Unconsciously and unknowingly, people’s behavior and aggression towards violence are influenced by the media. Majority of the youth is exposed to some sort of act of violence through the media before the age of ten years old. With the numerous and everlasting murders that have been occurring more frequently lately, school shootings, and fights going on it’s hard to ignore the violence factor that goes on in the world. Because children are still developing in their teenage years, seeing certain things such as inappropriate music, movies, television shows, etc. can affect their psychological development and views in the world.

Television can be a very powerful teacher to not only the youth, but adults as well. According to the BLS American Time Use Survey by A.C. Nielsen Co., approximately 99% of Americans own at least one television in their household. This shows just how accessible tv is and how common it is for people to be watching it. A new study in the Journal of Pediatrics says the average eight year old child spends eight hours a day on media, and teens more than 11 hours of media a day. This is more than a full day of school, which means the youth are being exposed the media and the inappropriate things it contains For example, they see things from funny memes to violent beatings and fights. With the youth being revealed to such at this young of an age, it’s already registered in their minds that this is common in society since it is praised and laughed at which can increase the likelihood of aggressive behavior at an older age without them even thinking much of it.

Kaj Björkqvist, a Professor of Developmental Psychology at Åbo Akademi University, randomly assigned one group of five- to six-year-old Finnish children to watch violent movies, another to watch nonviolent ones. Raters who did not know which type of movie the children had seen then observed them playing together in a room. Children who had just watched the violent movie were rated much higher on physical assault and other types of aggression. Other experiments have shown that exposure to media violence can increase aggressive thinking, aggressive emotions, and tolerance for aggression, all known risk factors for later aggressive and violent behavior. With the children being so young and naive, they had no clue how great of an impact the violent movie had on their actions and aggression. They were just following what they had seen in the movie and weren’t even incorporating the fact they were being violent which shows how unconscious people are with the influence violence in the media has.

The cartoon above is a perfect representation on how oblivious society is to the issues that we constantly encounter. There are constantly issues with violence in the world and we wonder where some of the root causes stem from, yet the answer is right in front of our eyes. The future is completely dependable upon how we bring up our children, which can either be a good or bad thing it’s all in the power of our hands. Allowing violence in the media to take over our children’s mindsets can only lead to even more violence and aggression, which this cartoon shows. It’s also shown above how the child is saying “Kill them! Kill them all!” With a huge smile on his face which shows he’s condoning the people who are being killed. Both the parents and the child are unaware of how violence is impacting and influencing their lives as shown in this cartoon.

On October 1, 2015 at Umpqua Community College located in Oregon, there was a mass shooting killing nine and wounding many others. The shooter, Christopher Harper- Mercer, after killing nine innocent people was shortly killed in gunfire with responding officers. After the shooting, the police investigated Harper- Mercer’s background and found that he was obsessed with violent gaming and would focus on this more than spending time with his family. His neighbors would say he was a nice young man, but was isolated majority of the time and only took interest in conversations when discussing video games and guns. While investigating, the police even found a secret chat room online which him and anonymous others were planning out exactly what he’d do. Before he had committed this tragic crime, he said “I’ve been waiting to do this for years”. Meanwhile, his companions were supporting him and even giving him ideas on when and where to do it. Recently, researchers at Ohio State University conducted a study and concluded that, "People who have a steady diet of playing these violent video games may come to see the world as a hostile and violent place”. Without even the slightest thought, one’s perception of the world can be altered just by constantly being exposed to violent video games.

In conclusion, the media can impact our daily life decisions unconsciously. Some solutions to reducing the influence violence in the media has on us are reducing the exposure to violent movies, television shows, videos games, etc. By doing this, it won’t place anyone in a specific and unhealthy mindset. Also, by increasing media that will have a positive effect on our lives and actually teach us something helpful both short and long-term will not only educate us, but place us in the right mindset that’ll benefit everyone in the world.

Citations

"Managing Media: We Need a Plan." Managing Media: We Need a Plan. 29 Oct. 13. Web. 21 Mar. 2016. <https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/managing-media-we-need-a-plan.aspx>.

Eves, Christopher. "Television Watching Statistics." Static Brain Research Institute, 18 Feb. 2016. Web. 21 Mar. 2016. <http://www.statisticbrain.com/television-watching-statistics/>.

Thoman, Elizabeth. "What Parents Can Do about Media Violence." Center for Media Literacy. Web. 21 Mar. 2016. <http://www.medialit.org/reading-room/what-parents-can-do-about-media-violence>.

Fletcher, Lyndee. "14 Mass Murders Linked to Violent Video Games." Charisma News. 15 Oct. 2015. Web. 21 Mar. 2016. <http://www.charismanews.com/culture/52651-14-mass-murders-linked-to-violent-video-games>.

Healy, Jack, and Ian Lovett. "Oregon Killer Described as Man of Few Words, Except on Topic of Guns." The New York Times. The New York Times, 2015. Web. 21 Mar. 2016. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/us/chris-harper-mercer-umpqua-community-college-shooting.html>.

A lot of research went into writing this essay. After reading 'The Things They Carry', I wanted to explore the deeper meaning of pain and the way each and every person experiences it. It was hard to find the perfect resources for my essay, but I ended up finding two perfect interviews, and a great image reflecting my words. I spent a long time trying to word my thoughts in a way people would understand, and although it was a challenge, I was able to use suggestion from my peers to write a piece I am proud of. I made sure not just to discuss the single meaning of pain, but the general meaning, so basically every single type of pain, whether it be physical, emotional, mental, etc..

Imagine being surrounded by an entire army, pointing all their guns at you. Unarmed civilians also surround you, fearing their lives, but knowing that they can’t back down because it’s a sign of weakness. One man steps up, knowing that there could be consequences, he decides to make peace between the army and the civilians, so he steps up, and all the guns are pointed at him, not you, yet you still fear. He places flowers in the gun, and no one makes a move or a sound, as if the man was now surrounded by the dead. He shows no signs of stopping, and as his bouquet of flowers becomes one single flower, you realize that it wasn’t fear of death you were feeling, it was fear of tyranny, and this man had just proven to you and everyone else there, the hypocrisy of pain and violence. One might think the previous statement was created to get them thinking of a somewhat realistic situation to better explain the healing of pain. It is anything but fictional, it’s an image of truth. The truth may be dreadful and uncomfortable, but this image expresses the tenderness of pain and its remedy. This is an image of life, a life put through violence and war, yet effectively reacts to a situation with the power of silence and influence.

Healing of agony can be conceived through an action, a memory, a statement, an image, or in better terms, it can be formulated in different ways, but as stated by Veena Das, a theoretician and ethnographer, there are two things that all healing has in common. “The notion of healing carried two ideas: the idea of endurance, and the idea of the capacity to establish a particular relationship to death….” One has to be willing to accept the pain they suffer to be able to alleviate the pain. In this way, not only is their acceptance, but realization that the pain will never go away, but awareness that mending pain is much stronger than any kind of pain itself.  “But I was very struck by the ways in which pain does write itself enduringly on people’s lives. It was not about a thunderous voice of pain, but about the manners in which pain was woven into the patterns of life.” You have to be open to all pain, to the consequences, or else healing will never happen, and only pain would ever exist. The thing is though, that without pain, life would be nothing. We would never experience reality, and we’d be selfish because without pain, we would get everything we wanted and thought we deserved. Pain draws a fairly clear line between selfishness and selflessness.

There is a single word that can bring terror and pain to many in an instant, a word so powerful that the meaning is pointless because it is nothing compared to the suffering and suffocation one is already in from just hearing the word. War...the word is war. As clearly stated by author Chris Hedges, “Yes. I think for those who are in combat, it very swiftly can become an addiction. War is its own subculture. It can create a landscape of the grotesque that is, perhaps, unlike anything else created by human beings.” Experiencing war in any way is a very difficult and uncomfortable experience that no one should go through. For soldiers, it’s as though war is a separate world, a separate language, or a separate life. Once in a war, you can never get out, even if the war is officially over. You become so intimate with it, that you can never forget about it. The horror will always be in your dreams, and the pain will always be crawling up your spine, and to your head, where you always remember every dreadful moment. War is something so unique and spectacular, that it is almost a mystery to the human race. We still explore war and it’s many characteristics, that is why war still exists and will never go away. There’s no meaning of war yet because we still don’t understand it, and there will never be one single clear definition. It’s existed for hundreds of years, yet it’s still something new and fresh that is somewhat unknown to our race.

A life with no pain, is a life not lived to the fullest. We suffer and always find a way to blame someone, yet the only one to blame should be ourselves, for not allowing leeway for reflecting on the good. Pain is different for everyone. Some might experience it through violence or war, and others might experience it from love, or hate, or even just life itself. Healing is a reflection of pain, and that is what needs to be understood to be able to live on, not move on, but to live your actual life, the life you grew up living. We must understand the difference between all pain, whether physical, mental, or emotional. As human beings, we have the right to express our pain, our anger, and our fight to healing. As human beings, we have the right to live.

WORK CITED

"Listening to Voices. An Interview with Veena Das." Interview by Kim Turcot DiFruscia. 2010. Web. 15 Mar. 2016. <http://www.alterites.ca/vol7no1/pdf/71_TurcotDiFruscia_Das_2010.pdf>

​This paper was my attempt to mix an analysis of this unit's topic and an analysis of war films. I used a lot that we learned from The Things They Carried and also some of my own research and conjecture. In putting the two ideas together, I came to the conclusion found at the end of the paper, but the process of writing the paper was the process of reaching the conclusion, not just explaining it. I found myself putting the ideas forth and then only connecting them at the end. I would like to do more research into the underlying psychology behind violent films, and in general how we react to role models (actors) doing something (violence). This could be imprinting, or it could be the tribal nature of humans, but I'd like to learn more about the psychology of violent films.

One of the hardest genres in film to get right is the war film. In an attempt to analyze film, one comes across this very tricky genre time and time again, and how hard it is to make a good war film. This may arise from the natural intricacies of telling a war story, and even the complicated nature of violence itself. I myself am interested in finding out how to make a good war film, and how this can apply to society’s greater, more general obsession with violence.

Storytelling is a constant battle to keep people engaged. A good storyteller will use all the tools in their tool belt to accomplish this goal: reveals, flashy visuals or details, twists, etc. Books, films, even songs use these same ideas and tools. In making a war film, the audience, we can assume, is already interested in the subject matter (and perversely so I might add). Years of western culture and civilization have trained them to love Hollywood shoot-em-up blockbusters and gory, violent video games. The fact that a war film can keep people entertained with its gore and violence is something addressed in two quotes from an interview with Tim O'Brien, the author of The Things They Carried, a prime example of a good war story. The two quotes (quotes two and three on this document) both suggest a different way of keeping the audience entertained: one way being a violent perverse attraction to violence and war and guns and bombs and death, the other being the immediate urgency that a war story and its consequential mortality brings to other morals, like love, relationships, and fairness.

Take, for example, the scene in Saving Private Ryan where the old veteran tears up at the grave, and then falls to his knees, bringing his family running. The shot shows an old veteran kneeling at a white cross tombstone, one of many that look the same in a graveyard of soldiers. The veteran kneels at the right of the frame, looking at the tombstone at the center of the frame. The tombstone splits the frame in half, separating the veteran from his family standing off in the distance. They are all dressed similarly, and so is the veteran, but their attention is (naturally) directed all over the place, some towards the veteran, some aimless, some amongst each other. The tombstone, while one of many just like it, is particular to this man, and keeps him separated visually from his family, as if they could never experience the things he has experienced, and so they can never truly connect with him. As the veteran falls down, the family runs up to him. The urgency of this experience is amplified by the family's own urgency, but is already engaging because of our subconscious awareness of mortality in this war story. The rest of the film may be engaging for that reason too, and also because of our "pornographic" infatuation with violence and war, but this specific scene just goes to show how themes can be amplified and morals can be engaged with when faced with the blatant mortality of war.

Many war stories attempt to cover different perspectives. Quote number eight from the O’Brien interview explains more about this. The Things They Carried covers only the perspectives of the soldiers, and while all of the different stories may extend the perspectives, they're still a perspective heard from another perspective; a story within a story. The book only covers one perspective. When the soldiers confront the corpse of a Viet Cong soldier, they are in fact confronting another perspective. The story does not extend past what the soldiers (in fact what O'Brien) saw of this new perspective. A good war story should, therefore, not extend to unknown perspectives, but just analyze them from the known perspective. It is like looking into another house from your own house. You cannot see what your window does not reveal.

The question to answer is this: what can violent films tell us about our obsession with violence? The answer itself is simple, although arriving to this conclusion might be a little more complicated. The reaction to and popularity of violent films are the most measurable insight into violence that those films can give us. Of the top ten all time highest grossing films (according to this list on the-numbers.com), eight of them featured violence. Of the infinite number of topics and plots to be covered in a film, violence is not featured in so many of them, and yet the most popular films usually feature violence, if not center around it completely. It should be an evident insight into the human psyche to see that our most popular films are those that glorify, romanticize, and practically endorse violence. If we see our favorite actor beating the crap out of some dude, aren’t we going to do the same? It’s the simple psychology of following a role model, and if the movies you see everyday promote violence, how can you not practice it?

We have a “pornographic” interest in violence, which extends to an obsession. While war films are feats of storytelling, and enhance the story being told, they definitely end up promoting violence. War films are an insight into our obsession with violence, because violence enhances morals, and makes our mortality come to the surface, making everything else more real. We love seeing more violent films because we’re obsessed with violence and the way it affects storytelling. This ends up endorsing violence, and making it both more accepted as well as more practiced by society. Violent films show us that our obsession with violence stems from its effect on storytelling, and that this promotes violence in our society.

Works Cited

"All Time Highest Grossing Movies Worldwide." The Numbers. Nash Information Services, LLC, n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2016. <http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/records/All-Time-Worldwide-Box-Office>.

Interview with Tim O’Brien

O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried: A Work of Fiction. New York: Broadway, 1998. Print.

Intro:

In english, we have been studying violence and militarism. I found this unit to be inspiring. The essay below is about how violence changes life around us and creates an endless cycle. Unlike the past advanced essays, this one is very factual. I feel like this essay should demonstrates a skill for analysis and critical thinking.

Essay:

Violence has a long standing history in society. Violence is ingrained in human nature in many ways. An understanding of violence now plays a key role in many of our social interactions. Some people have even evolved to be more aggressive because as as a society we reward aggression.
One known genetic activity that predisposes people to physical aggression is a low activity form of monoamine oxidase. Monoamine oxidase is an enzyme that deconstructs key neurotransmitters. According to Brown university this is much more common in countries with a history of war. Even though Darwinism isn’t easily applicable to the modern man because of the complexities of human attractions, The fact that this gene can still be found suggest that there is some benefit to aggression in the modern day. And there is. For whatever reason people find aggression to be dominating and it’s often confused for assertive. Although a society such as ours could never condone outright violence between it’s members, a functional type of aggression is encouraged. We see this on Wall Street, where aggression, greed , and a type of barbarism are thought of as the essential qualities of a good stock broker. We see this type of aggression in radical groups, where it’s often confused for passion.
Behavioral evidence of how are sour social interactions have been altered by violence can be seen in the way we treat the natural  phenomenon fight or flight.Most people are familiar with the fight or flight instinct. It’s what compels you to either flee from danger or address it head on. We often reward and cherish the instinct to fight while we shame those who follow the flight instinct. This illustrated in the book “The Things We Carry” by  TIm O’Brien. In the book he states that the primary motivation for fighting in the Vietnam War for many soldiers was, they would be embarrassed not to. They feared being called cowards by their contemporaries. This is profound because of what it says violence in America. Circumstances aside, many of the characters believe pacifism is weakness and something to be ashamed of. This severe and negative connotation seem inherently wrong. Pacifism is objectively beneficial. All major religions agree that pacifism is a virtue. This fear of non-violence is abnormal, but strong in our society. During World War I, a man named Evan Thomas refused to fight because he thought it was immoral. He was court martialed and prosecuted. During his prosecution, a debate about cowardice verse pacifism arose. The prosecutor is quoted as saying “The very foundation of every civilized government from the first beginning of history down to the present time has been based absolutely upon force of arms… Gentlemen, if we don’t punish these cowards who appear in this land like the sore spots on our bodies to the fullest limit of the law, this government cannot survive.”

The image above shows two little boys playing. One is pinned to the wall by the other. The one pinned to the wall has a fake gun pressed to his brow. Both boys are smiling vigorously, but the one on the wall appears to be on the edge of laughter. The image as a whole is a disturbing look at how violence changes social normalities. American culture is saturated in violence. Violence is so present that even children have an intimate relationship with the concept. They grow numb to the sight of gore. Acts of violence become casual or even humorous. The negative effects of childhood exposure to violence are well documented.  Children who are exposed to this violence learn at an early age that some forms of violence are an acceptable way to solve problems.
Intervention with behaviors that model this mentality in their children  fail to suffocate these ideas in the long term. Data from the Department of Justice states that those who are exposed to violence at a young age have an increased risk of falling into criminal activity. Specifically violent crime, which demonstrates a lack of awareness of acceptable social interactions. These people have permanently altered views on social norms which stand to protect us against such violences as rape, petty murder, and assault.
In conclusion, Violence alters social normalities, which in turn allows for  more violence. This creates a positive feedback loop that has the potential to alter human societies in such a way that it affects us on even the most obscure and unexpected ways. We’ve seen it affect us on both a genetic and philosophical level.

Work cited:

Sontag, Susan. "Regarding The Torture Of Others." The New York Times. The New York Times, 22 May 2004. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/23/magazine/regarding-the-torture-of-others.html?_r=1

"African Americans in the Vietnam War." African Americans in the Vietnam War. Illinois University, 20 Dec. 2009. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/s_z/stevens/africanamer.htm

O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried: A Work of Fiction. New York: Broadway, 1998. Print.

Rose McDermott. "Some People Just Like to Fight." Political Violence a Glance. N.p., 03 Feb. 2014. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

http://politicalviolenceataglance.org/2014/02/03/some-people-just-like-to-fight/

Thomas, Louisa. "Give Pacifism a Chance." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Aug. 2011. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/opinion/sunday/what-is-pacifism-good-for.html?_r=0

"Facts about Children and Violence." Facts about Children and Violence. The Department of Justice, n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

https://www.justice.gov/defendingchildhood/facts-about-children-and-violence

Truth is a fact or something stated that is accepted as true. A story is an account of past events in someone’s life. The truth can’t always be true and a story can’t always be true. Technology can help us support stories and the truth but even technology doesn’t show hundred percent of the story. What is the actually difference between the truth and the story?

For example from witness.org, "What WITNESS does is create, support, and sustain a global network of people who use video as their tool, as their weapon. This network reminds us that we are not a single voice; we are not alone." Another example is “WITNESS identifies ways for citizens to capture and preserve footage to improve its chances of it being used in the courtroom. Through tools, training, and advocacy efforts, we aim to help activists capture and use video as evidentiary material.” Another example was “The WITNESS Media Lab is dedicated to addressing the challenges of sourcing, verifying, and contextualizing eyewitness video to advance its use as a powerful tool for human rights documentation and advocacy. Visit the Lab for curated footage, analysis, cases studies, and resources.” The last example is “WITNESS responds to crisis situations around the globe by providing on the ground trainings, coordinating with local citizens and organizations, and making online resources available in multiple languages. Our aim is to help human rights defenders film more safely and effectively in dangerous and unpredictable environments.”

Technology can sometimes be usefully by showing video evidence of what happened during an incident. Other times technology isn’t as useful. It wouldn't be useful in a situation where it only shows one or a single part of video footage of an incident. Video footage doesn’t always tell the full story or the truth. That’s why technology including cameras outside in the streets or in stores shows some evidence but don’t at the same time.

Here is a young African American male. This young African American male is about 17 years old. He is taking a picture and looking directly into the camera. He has a white hoodie on top of his head. His name is Trayvon Martin. As Trayvon looks into this picture his eyes look like he has fear and innocence in them. Martin facial expression makes him seem like he is a little bit angry or upset about something.

Technology was a big key in the Trayvon Martin case. Trayvon Martin was walking back from the store going back to his location when George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watchman, claims Trayvon had his hoodie on and was high. He called 9/11 and said something about African American being high walking around in the rain and he thought Trayvon was up to something. The cops told him not to follow Trayvon but he followed Trayvon anyways and then claimed they began arguing and then started fighting. After, he claimed Trayvon tried to grab his gun and then he pulled out his gun and shot Trayvon Martin in the chest.

CNN website gave us the whole story and everything with details including phone calls, maps, and more. CNN stated “The same analysis also didn't reach conclusions as to whether Zimmerman used a racial epithet to describe Martin on his own 911 call, as some have alleged. Martin's family have said they believe Zimmerman, a white Hispanic, profiled the African-American teen.” Another example is Zimmerman's voice, meanwhile, comes through on a 911 call he made around that time, telling a dispatcher about "a real suspicious guy." "This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining, and he's just walking around." Another example is “The dispatcher asked Zimmerman, who'd called 911 at least four times previously for other incidents, if he was following the person. He replies, We don't need you to do that," the dispatcher responded. But Zimmerman followed him anyway.” Last quote is “Federal civil rights charges are difficult to press, let alone get convictions for. In its press release about the decision, the lack of charges against Zimmerman are said to be a result of being unable to meet the standard of proving that the "defendant knew his acts were unlawful, and committed those acts in open defiance of the law. DOJ officials said they would have had to have proven that Zimmerman approached Martin in a threatening manner before the fatal shooting because of Martin's race.”

Technology helped us know where Trayvon was coming from and all the extra details. He don’t know if George Zimmerman shot him because he was a young African American male with a hoodie on. Even the police calls when George Zimmerman called the cops of him talking to them that part even helped the case out by the cell phones. We don’t know if this was the full story or if it was even the full truth. George Zimmerman got charged for murder that he committed. Then later on they released him because they didn’t have a whole lot of evidence to charge him with murder. People till this day still talk about this case because this wasn’t right and they let a guilty man let go.

Technology was also a big key in the Kevin Garner case. Kevin Garner was 43 African American male. Kevin Garner was a front of a store. A fight broke out with two other males. New York City Police put him in a chokehold and slamming his head to the pavement. He keep telling them he couldn’t breathe but they didn’t listen at all. He continued to choke him. They claim he was selling untaxed cigarette which is illegal. There is still a question if he was selling cigarettes or not? The police say yes and some of the witness say no. People say the police are saying yes because they would have a reason to arrest him and by killing him that they don’t get in trouble.. After all this talk the police officers were never charged. Technology played a role in this case, it didn’t give us the outcome that we wanted but in our heads we know the truth.

Simple Justice gave us the whole story with updates and a full video of what happen with police and Garner asking them multiple times to stop. Simple Justice stated “New York City police officers killed a man Thursday after he had broken up a fight between two other men, insisting on placing him in a chokehold and slamming his head to the pavement, piling on top of him as he gasped for air and as he continually told the cops he couldn’t breathe.” Another example from the website is “I can’t breathe! I can’t breathe!” Eric Garner, 43, repeatedly screamed after at least five NYPD officers took him down in front of a Tompkinsville beauty supply store when he resisted being handcuffed.” The website also stated “The entire incident was caught on video from a witness who kept telling the cops that the man had not committed a crime.” Another example is “Within moments Garner, a married father of six children with two grandchildren, ceased struggling and appeared to become unconscious as police called paramedics to the scene. An angry crowd gathered, some recording with smartphones.” They stated “He referred to police rules that forbid chokeholds and define them as including “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”

Technology helped us by giving us a clear view. It had recorded full video from witness smartphones of police going over to Kevin Garner getting choked up and getting over abused by officers. The smartphone video also helped us by giving us a story about what happen. It also had the part when Garner pleading to the cops that he couldn’t breathe at all. Did the officer do this because his skin color?

What is the difference between “story” and “truth”? Race, technology, story and truth all comes together as one big topic. By using technology like cell phones videos, store camera videos, police officer body camera videos, cop car dash cameras videos, we can actually see what is happening than someone saying their side of the story and some of the truth and not the full truth. With the world advancing we can catch the little stuff now and now days everyone records everything and anything. We can catch abuse from officer or any abuse or anything now days just because of the improvement of technology. We can catch on video racist acts happening to any skin color by another person. We can use the video to help us in court or anything to watch what happen but sometimes we don’t get the full video of what actually happen and the full thing. We can capture moments of the video but we probably wouldn’t get the full video.

Work cited used:

• "NYPD Kills Eric Garner on Video (Update)." Simple Justice. 2014. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

• "Human Rights Campaigns & Projects from WITNESS." WITNESS. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

• CNN. Cable News Network. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

In this unit, we were going over how violence is incorporated in today's society. From all of our discussions, I decided to write about if we, as human beings, could live in a utopia, which is an absence of violence. My goal was to look towards the future and empower individuals. I use the stories of people who have been involved in wars in order to show how these violent situations can destroy the innocence of people and it starts with ourselves to have a utopia.

The world is a tree. It stands with strong roots built throughout the evolution of humans. In addition to building roots, human beings are the bark and stem of this tree. We have made societies that help make a strong system in order to exist in a world together. At the top half of this tree, the leaves are made up of the individual people of the world. The world is one big tree, but from the very beginning, this tree was always destined to have an ugly side. The side that is always shown is the side where it looks like every single person is able to receive the necessities and every person connected to the tree faces no type of traumatizing events.

This idea of the world being a tree is is presented in the above picture. The picture is made of  hands. It is a representation of the world and the countries that make up the world. There are seven bigger hands in the back of the smaller hands. This could be a representation of the 7 continents of the world. The entire picture is of hands, making it show humans make up everything given to us in this world. Throughout the history of the world, humans have found a way to adapt to certain situations and environments and this has helped us evolve overtime. The picture shows that everyone is born with an acceptance of every person no matter who they are and where they are from and this allows us to build a strong rooted tree, or just a strong society.

The idea of a world in which everyone happy and nobody experiences pain is something that would be ideal, but could we, as human beings, live in a society rooted in nonviolence? The real question is could human beings live in a utopia? The simple answer is no. The evolution of human beings has had tremendous bloodshed and with that bloodshed, people have held ideas that keep them from accepting others. This is just the unfortunate truth as to why humans couldn’t live in a utopia. But how does violence make a society unable to be in harmony?

In many instances through history, when a problem between two countries, groups, or people occurs, violence is the first solution often looked upon. As defined by Google, violence is behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. When applied to conflicts between countries, these acts of violence lead to war. War is somethings that has heavily influenced the reason why humans beings wouldn’t be able to live in a utopia. For instance, Michael Abbatello joined the Marines and after coming home, he describes how his whole mindset changed. “Something is changed. You know, you feel down to your spirit. You know that you’re different now. You know, we don’t really have a consciousness of our own spirit until it’s wounded, and then it needs help” (PBS 2010). Micheal Abbatello is a real life example of of how war can destroy a person. When someone is placed into a very raw situation, such as war, the mindset of a perfect world is destroyed. As a result, as the idea of a peaceful world is destroyed and the world becomes a dog eat dog place.

In addition to Micheal Abbatello, many other people who are in war, whether they are civilians or soldiers, end up having their minds, morals, and outlook changed to a more negative perspective. Veterans came to our school and one of them named John Graham stated that “ war is easy to start, but hard to finish”. This is something that is true because no human being is born with an understanding on misery. Humans are born in an innocent state and this mindset is ruined because nothing in war is innocent.

Even though human beings could not live in the utopia anytime soon, there is still hope for the distant generations to live in a utopia. Right now, the world has a lot of violence penetrating the everyday lives and minds of innocent people. From the Syrian refugee crisis to the police brutality in the United States, violence in today's society is so prevalent that the current generation on the verge of living more into a dystopian society. However, the answer of how can this change lies within each individual. As Scilla Elworthy states, “It’s my response, my attitude towards oppression that I have control over… And what I need to do is to develop self-knowledge” (Fighting with Nonviolence, April 2012). This self knowledge is the realization that violent acts like war happen when humans let emotion overtake their thoughts and actions. In a situation,  Elworthy states, “That means I need to know how I tick, when I collapse, where my formidable points are, where my weaker points are. When do I give in? What will I stand up for?”. By being in control of our emotions, humans are in control of the world.

So the world tree that is in a wiltering state is able to stand upright once more again if people are aware of the power their emotions have in this world. “The only thing you can do is get up, make a cup of tea, and sit with that fear…...and anger is like gasoline and if you throw it around and someone lights a match, you have an inferno”. Controlling emotions is a major key in order for the world tree to go back into its original state: a utopia.

Works Cited:

• Elworthy, Scilla. "Fighting with Nonviolence." TED. Apr. 2012. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

• Severson, Lucky. "Moral Wounds of War." PBS. PBS, 28 May 2010. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

• Gregory, Sam. "Images of Horror: Whose Roles and What Responsibilities? - WITNESS Blog." WITNESS Blog. 2014. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.