Native American Still Walking Mother Earth

In a piece by Peter Singer entitled, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Singer argues that Americans should prevent atrocious situations to arise but, we also should not sacrifice something of equal importance while doing so. Moreover, in the piece by John Arthur, “World Hunger and Moral Obligation: The Case Against Singer,” Arthur disagrees with Singer; he believes that we should help the poverty-stricken but, it is not morally imperative to do so.

“The Canary Effect” is a documentary that explains the history of the United States from the perspective of the Native American people. The truth about this country’s history has been known for a long time but seldom taught. Columbus is not a hero who discovered this land, but a man who started the desecration of the Native American people, even to this day, this country’s repulsive treatment of native people continues to be disturbingly reinforced by the US government.

Though a vast majority of students learn about Columbus’ great conquests and celebrate him as a hero, very few know of the horrible atrocities he caused when he first landed in America. While considered a hero by most in the United States, Zinn argues that people should think twice about Columbus’ actions, and question whether his behavior to the Indians was necessary. In quotes one and five, Zinn clearly depicts his thoughts on the atrocities done by Columbus and other colonists to the natives living in America.

     In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer is trying to argue that “the way people in relatively affluent countries react to a situation… cannot be justified; indeed,… our moral conceptual scheme needs to be altered and with it, the way of life that has come to be taken for granted in our society”(Singer 230). Peter Singer provides striking examples to show the reader how realistic his arguments are. In this paper, I will briefly give a summary of Peter Singer’s argument and the assumptions that follow, adding personal opinions for or against Peter’s statements. I hope that within this paper, I am able to be clearly show you my thoughts in regards to Singer.

At first Hardin’s ethics seem rude and selfish, but as you continue reading he makes it clear this may be the only way to save our world and have it become a better place. For instance, "on the average poor countries undergo a 2.5 percent increase in population each year; rich countries, about 0.8 percent. If the poor countries received no food from the out side, the rate of their population growth […]" (Hardin 4). Hardin continues his piece explaining why rich countries should not help poorer countries that are in need. He believes a poor country that needs support needs to learn the hard way, even if that means losing resources or people. His words like "rich countries", "no food" shows the use of a metaphor that Hardin is able to paint a visual illustration of his argument to his audience. This helps influence and persuade his readers because they are able to grasp the whole concept of Hardin’s argument. Hardin also spoke in his essay using the repetition of the words "we" and "us" is a language factor that persuades the audience to accept Hardin’s ideas because it implicates that he and his audience is of equal status. Here, the ethics he reveals in his essay have good reasoning. Helping someone in need has always been a moral in someone’s life. But now, Hardin proposes a new ethic, "lifeboat ethics". Singer, on the other hand, often refers to the fact that nearly one-third of Americans spend their income on luxuries that they “desire” instead of donating the

Chavez begins his rationalization reminding the audience of the vigorous efforts Dr.King displayed in his cause; comparing and contrasting violence against non violence. Chavez explicitly states violence leads to nothing more than “injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides” as non violence is “supportive and crucial.” His variation in diction deriving from descriptions of deaths and injuries as opposed to the righteous dignation convinces readers with what they would prefer. Similarly, his mentioning of violence as being harmful to “both sides” helps bring clarity to a point with lack of bias, and demonstrates how violence is damaging to all equally, regardless of his position on civil rights. He later moves on to once again explicitly stating distinct contrasts.

In 1492, Italian cartographer and explorer, Christopher Columbus, set off on a mission from Spain in order to find a quicker, alternative route to Asia. With him, Columbus brought eighty-seven men and three ships, the Niña, the Pinta, and the Santa María, to sail across the large and vast Atlantic Ocean. Unfortunately for Columbus, a new route to Asia was never discovered by Spain that year because he had arrived in the Caribbean, which was found in North America. Thinking that he had just entered the Indies, he started to call the people of this land, “Indians”. These Indians were actually Native Americans who had lived on these lands for thousands of years prior. Immediately, letters from Columbus to the King and Queen of Spain were sent by boat back to Europe and soon Columbus was seen as the man who helped create a bridge of prosperous trading and riches between Europe and “Asia”.1 While this discovery proved that Columbus was a hero-like figure to Spain, it’s what he did within the new land that actually makes him one of the biggest villains to ever set foot on Earth. But what classifies this explorer as a villain? Columbus captured thousands of natives, many of which were sent back to Spain to live and work as slaves. Along with that, Columbus also forced the Christian religion onto them, spread diseases that killed thousands of lives, and used violence as a means of persuasion and control.2 Corrupted by his pursuit of riches,

In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer claims that “if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it.” Additionally, Singer believes that distance is no excuse for allowing something bad to happen; thus, we ought to help people on the other side of the world the same way we would help a neighbor – even though we may feel further inclined to help our neighbors. Moreover, Singer states that people should help as much as possible, without putting themselves or their dependents at risk of suffering. Peter Singer is correct in stating that people with the capacity to prevent something bad from occurring should do so; however,

Hardin's complex dexterity of petrifying diction is brought to a halt when compared to the scientific diction seen in Durning's article. Hardin's nauseating, fear-provoking diction is rendered in the same passage mentioned in the previous paragraph; the unequivocal author uses words such as: "swamps," "drowns," and "catastrophe" (Hardin, 477). All of these words are associated with devastation and misfortune as Hardin tries to point out our suffering as a result of caring for the poor nations. This is an example of the visceral appeal Hardin employs to scare his audience by having them consider the consequences of not abiding into just letting the still developing nations handle themselves.

How does one form an effective argument? Ceaser Chavez uses logical appeals, the credibility of important figures, and emotional connections in order to form his arguments. The excerpt he demonstrates this with a clear message in regards to nonviolence. In “He Showed Us The Way”, Ceaser Chavez employs ethos, pathos, and logos to demonstrates how nonviolent practices are more effective then using violence. Among the most direct rhetorical techniques that Chavez implements is ethos, corroborating the power of nonviolence.

Native Americans more than any other group in the country fare considerably worse based on social and economic indicators. They suffer high poverty rates, low life expectancy, and higher than usual rates of illness. Alcoholism and suicide rates are especially rampant within the reservations. One of the most devastating programs, with concerns which are still felt today, was the systematic removal of native lands and children. Native Americans were forced off their lands to undesirable lands, slowly falling more dependent on federal government assistance and food distributions. Then slowly children were taken from their kin and placed in government funded church ran boarding schools, where they were disciplined for speaking their languages or practicing their native traditions. But let’s look at the traditions of the Native American woman.

This chapter talks about the struggles that black farmers endure. It talks about how black farmers are in a constant state of disadvantage. I agree with this because I know that today, in the United States, we are dealing with activists of “Black Lives Matter”. I find it shocking that in 2016 there is still racism because race should not define the way a person is treated. It is upsetting to read that resources are only available to some people based on their location, nationality, class, gender, race, ethnicity. Food is essential to all human beings, it is unfair that it only be available to some people. These resources, being something essential to human life like electricity, or heat (gas), should be readily available. Similarly, I can connect

Violence has been interpreted in various way by authors as the centuries have gone by. In Candide, Voltaire paints a picture about violence in the 17th century as war that continues to rage over centuries between empires with the main protagonist Candide, and his fellow members being subjected to all kinds of hardships as they themselves become casualties of war. In the Dew Breaker, Danticat discusses the extent of the everlasting damage, both physical and psychological, that is caused by totalitarian regimes, such as the Duvalier’s in Haiti in the 1970s. The central character in this story, The Dew Breaker represents an individual that is the product of such regimes, with his cruel and sadistic past as a torturer epitomizing violence. On the

Pages 1- 39 of Slavoj Zizek’s Violence was an introduction to the three forms of violence: subjective, objective, and systemic. One of the main points he made in the introduction was that humanitarians, while they may genuinely want to help the needy with their wealth, they fail to realize that their wealth is a s a result of systemic violence. This is a unique perspective in that people of wealth who donate a lot of their money to those less fortunate are usually seen in society as heroes by those who watch them do so. It is very rare that someone actually acknowledges that they are only able to perform these acts of humanitarianism for precisely the reason the people they are helping need to be rescued. Zizek also makes a point of acknowledging

Since 1991, the southern half of Somalia, a poverty stricken African nation, has seen various tribal militias battle for dominance and power over individual regions of the country. Violence has plagued Mogadishu, the capital, since warlords ousted the former president. Mere months after the collapse of the government, men, women and children in torn clothes ran helplessly towards packages dropped from military planes towards the hot sand of their tiny village. This action was one of many attempts to help underdeveloped nations receive food by the United Nations' World Food Programme. Within his article titled "Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor", Garret Hardin, a well-known philosopher of ecology, analyzes the difficulty