Rwanda

The Rwandan genocide discussion made me realize a lot more about what really happened between the Tutsis and the Hutus and who actually started it (Belgium!!). I really found out how Belgium came in and basically started the war and then just decided to leave. It’s not right what they did and they’re the big people to blame. I also learned about the Interahamwe and how they killed many people which still isn’t right even if they say that they had to kill which I think is a load of bull. The U.S.A said they didn’t do anything wrong but that’s a lie too because yeah they just stayed out of it but they’re the number one country in power and they’re not going to help anyone? Well that’s wrong because they could have basically ended the war with all the power, but they didn’t so that’s the main thing they did wrong.

I like the way we did this discussion because it helped me learn a lot better about it. I liked this a lot more instead of just taking notes on this and then taking a test because I seem to learn a lot more in an interesting way because I like interacting with what we are doing. I would like this way more often and it would help me a lot more learning about it. There were some things that I didn’t like though like the way some of the information was put out and also how we just got a little jist if each group we didn’t get the whole thing, I think I would have liked learning a little more about each one, like maybe we should have talked about our groups more than just a little introduction. I’ve never done this in a class before so it was a new experience to me so I really enjoyed it a lot. If we could learn it this way all the time I would be a lot more informed about what’s going on because when were having our “debates” in class, I really would like to get involved but I don’t know what to see but this new way I actually knew what I was doing and what was going on. I really would like to do this more often in class.

"The American Scholar"

Emerson's argument in "The American Scholar" about American society still holds true today.

One reason Emerson's argument still holds true today is that people can be good at doing more then one thing and they can like doing more then one thing. In the story The American Scholar, it says this, "That the gods, in the beginning, divided man into men, that he might be more helpful to himself; just as the hand was divided into fingers, the better to answer its end." I believe this because its saying how a man could do more with five fingers instead of just with a hand and how a man could do more then just one thing. I can relate to how Emerson is saying that a man can do more then just one job because my dad was an engineer but when there was something wrong with the house like craftsman job or an electrician's job, my dad could fix it.

Another reason Emerson's argument still holds true today is that just because someone went to college to do one specific career doesn't mean they have to stay with that just one career, if they wanted to they should be able to because we have the capability of doing more then just one thing. I can relate to this because my aunt was a teacher but ended up getting tired of doing the same routine everyday so she ended up quiting her teaching job and went looking for another job. Its like if someone was playing baseball and started getting sick of the sport, then the person should go and try a different sport that they actually like. This relates to this situation because its like the tennis player is man looking for a new job because they're sick of the one they already have.