question 2: analysis

President John F. Kennedy’s speech was in response to the steel companies and their disregard of his word when he asked for stable prices in manufactured products and wages as a part of a program he had established. The program required sacrifice of a national scale due to an economic crisis during that time. Of course he could not just outright shutdown the company or have the owners removed; such actions would cause a scandal the size of Mt. Everest. If he would have taken such a course of action the whole nation would have eaten him alive; would’ve said that he took the wrong course of action, that he is damaging American business, and that he does not believe in the great capitalist values and freedoms of the American nation and many other variations of these accusations. The media, the public, and politics in general would have all turned against him. So he didn’t do that and instead he turned the American population against the steel corporations. Brilliant using tactics like this to get his way. He starts off by sounding very sympathetic and reasonable in his requests for companies and corporations of the United States, reasoning that due to the war going on and the economic crisis going on in the country some sacrifices had to be made. He sells his argument more by giving statistics on corporations that had to cut back and how the steel corporations not only did not cut back prices but also increased them, by giving statistics he not only gives more credibility but also makes the steel corporations look bad on a mathematical view point. This whole speech can really be summarized as the bashing of steel corporations and the catering of the American masses sensibilities. 

Kennedy uses a multitude of strategies when trying to convert the audience against the steel corporations. Kennedy’s word choices in his speech, for example, are a perfect example of how. Words such as “unjustifiable” and “irresponsible”, used to describe what the steel corporations did do not portray them as ‘good’ actions. It does the opposite, these words send a strong negative connotation to the audience. He also uses statistics to further his argument; this not only serves to prove his point about the corporations to the public, but also to give his more credibility and a stronger argument. He lists some sounding credible sources such as the “Acting Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics” as well as his secretary of defense McNamara. These sources are preceded or go after some sort of statistic that help his argument. Even after his given statistic he elaborates with how it is relevant to the American people and how badly if affects them as a nation and as individuals. He acknowledges that due to the war going on that most of the American dollars have gone to funding it; of course he does not word that way, instead he uses the words “national security” and “other purposes” perhaps he did not outright say “war” because of the anti-war spirit going on in the United States at the time. Continuing on why he acknowledged the cost of war, he then tells the people of how that will affect American business for the worse and in order to prevent that his program had to be carried out, but that big steel corporations chose to ignore.

All of speech however, was not just statistics followed by logical conclusions with undertones of bashing steel corporations. It also had a good chunk of righteous appeal. Which for those times of war was crucial for governments to have the support of the American public and the only way for it to gain support was to appeal to nationality and ethical reasoning. Kennedy gave a very good example of this in has second paragraph where he combined both of these things. Using men who have had to leave behind their families to fight for war and glorifying their deaths as a great sacrifice for the safety of the country as an example in his speech serves to give people a sorrowful yet patriotic feeling. Then he uses labor workers that hold down their requests for wages as another lesser but just as important of a sacrifice. He also puts himself at the level of the common American person with “as do I” when talking about the difficulty of adjusting to when “restraint and sacrifice are being asked of every citizen”. This gives the American people a sense of unity and comfort, in thinking that their president is on their side and goes through their same struggles. In using these methods of persuasion that worked well in accomplishing the goal of gaining the American population’s support and turning them against steel corporations

question 1: synsthesis

1. 
   

The locavore movement is an up and coming way of life that taken up the preference of many people in different countries. Yet what begs the question is whether it’s possible for everyone to become a locavore as many wish. The locavore movement, like any movement that a population takes on, has a variety of different factors; such as, the economy of many businesses and farmers and shipping companies, availability, and also the legitimacy and quality of  new local farmers. This issues must be addressed in order for an actual beneficial locavore movement to take place and become something actually life changing.
The locavore argument for becoming a locavore revolves around two basic ideas: helping the local economy and living a healthier lifestyle through the foods they consume. The locavore movement helps out the local farmer’s economy. The locavore movement is better because food is fresh and the fresher the healthier and better you’ll feel! All these points for the locavore movement only focus on very shallow factors and don’t look at the big picture or the complex structure there is to the food market. One thing to look at is the quality of one’s local farming. Are the methods of the local farms safe, humane, and good for one’s health? Source C is all about a study conducted by the New Zealand government on the method of raising lamb in both New Zealand and England and what is better for a Londoner to consume. According to the studies a lamb in England is raised in a factory while a lamb in New Zealand is not. Most of the common people understand how inhumane it is to an animal for it to be raised in a factory, but for many urban places with less land area it’s convenient so it’s done anyway. However, for some that like to eat a less guilt filled meal, there is the shipping of product from other lands with better agricultural techniques.
With these conditions of the quality of agriculture in mind we move on to availability. Most urban places will have farms of different sorts’ miles away from urban civil life itself. What happens in places that don’t, they have to get their food from a faraway source. In California there are many local farms that provide Californians with fruits and veggies of all sorts, there is enough land to raise livestock, and conveniently there is an ocean from which to get a variety of seafood. It’s all pretty much great for a Californian, food wise at least. However, what about the more center states that have limited food sources, perhaps not crop wise since most of the center states are mostly giant planes, but they would have a limited source of other types of food like seafood. Unless those states invest to bring those types of food from other places from other non-local places. The point here is that the locavore movement will eventually limit the vast American diet the most are used to having in this modern world.
The economy of farmers and shippers should also be acknowledged that if the locavore movement does take over the agricultural market, it will affect those people’s economy and income. It will affect many big businesses and corporations as well, and perhaps that’s a good thing since most require a tremendous amount of agricultural recourses from many different parts of the globe and the locavore movement of buying only locally could affect them negatively. Also the shipping industry will also be affected in a negative way if people start becoming locavores. The requirement for food shipping in planes will drastically drop, and that is probably better for the environment; even though humans still kill it with doing a lot of other things, but it would be a move in the right direction. Either way most locavore advocates don’t seem to think about how the locavore movement will affect the economy on a much grander scale, even if it could work to further their movement.
The locavore movement needs work and needs to take all these factors into consideration if it actually intends to be a global phenomenon and new way of life. With the rate of technological advancements and the demand for faster ways to live, it’s very possible that the locavore movement can find a way to please the modern human and his or hers demands for variety. Eventually if all these factors of availability, economic influence on a grander scale, and how the quality differs from farm to farm then they could truly progress and transform the locavore movement to be at its maximum of potential.

Autobiography

Some might say that I was born at an academic disadvantage; neither of my parents were born as citizens of the United States and both had little education to offer, little time could be dedicated towards me partly due to the never ending struggle of the lower-working class and partly due towards the attention my autistic younger sister needed. However, despite the odds that seem stacked up against me, I strive to come up on top and become someone great.

Going back through my educational history, I find that I was always average or above average in all my academics without needing to put in much time into studying or note taking; I see now that this was harmful to me because now I’m not just naturally good at things as I was in my younger school days. Now I struggle with note taking and studying on my own, which leads to my contradicting personality.

 Personally I enjoy history and English classes the most; however, even that is based on how well a teacher teaches. I find history and English to be the most interesting subjects. For English you can learn so much different word play that leads for interesting conversation and clarity in text that’s either for pleasure or work. Learning about history is important because it gives us understanding on why things are the way they are today, why governments are run the way they are, why some countries are at war with other countries, why are some countries richer than others. It’s an easy subject to distort as well, due to perspective of any person telling of past events our own opinions are easily influenced. Once upon a time I was a child and I was led to believe that Christopher Columbus was an honorable and valiant explorer that discovered America all on his own; however, now I can see that he was neither of these things and all he truly was, was a lucky man whose interests lied in gold and fame and who committed genocide against a group of natives who were practically defenseless against him. History is a fascinating subject and an important one, if I ever want to make my dream of becoming a good politician, a reality

.

Ironically I struggle with both of these subjects, but do quite well in mathematics. Perhaps the reason to that is the strict and organized schedule of all my math teacher or perhaps because math is a straight forward subject. In fact, whenever I have the most trouble with math solving is when it involves words. I think that a good teacher can take any subject and make it simple or understandable. However for me I need to at least be indifferent with the teacher in order to actually focus and try in a class. If a teacher were to try that whole “mean” act and try to scare me into submission, like one of my ninth grade teachers tried to, it won’t work and I’ll be sure to fail. To me earning respect does not include scare tactics, and a teacher especially, should not try to scare their students into respecting them. I am contradictory to myself when it comes to this because I prefer a teacher to have a strict and organized routine when I myself an anything but organized and strict.

One of the questions asked the first day in this class was to name the streets of my old schools; however I found those facts to be trivial and therefore forgotten the street names. My elementary school was Los Angles elementary and as the name would suggest it is located in Los Angeles. For three of the most unpleasant years of my life, I was confined in Bancroft middle school.

One instance I remember from last year was doing well on a final project for Spanish. I worked on it alone even though it was suggested for us to work in groups. Even so I did better than some of the kids that did work in groups and for that I felt pretty good. I learned that I could work by myself and do well on my own. Still I know that I will not be able to hide behind my walls of antisocial-ness and will need to build up my courage and social skills in order to become an influential person and change society for the better with my ideas.