American Studies in Iran

American Studies in Iran
American Studies in Iran is full of contradictions and paradoxes. So my impression from America as an Iranian inevitably contains all these paradoxes. My first impression and image from America is not Walt Disney, Mickey Mouse or other sweet and delightful images that would be the answer if you ask other children around the world. The first thing that I remember as a five year old child in 1988 was IR655, a civilian airliner shot down by U.S. missile, and the films and pictures of dead bodies of the victims floating in the water, and my eyes wide open half with fear half with curiosity at the scenes and the TV channel was changed soon because the pictures were too frightful for a baby to watch! I knew that this was done by an American navy in the Gulf and latter when I was fully grown I found that the men of the Vincennes were all awarded combat-action ribbons for what was considered a heroic action: 66 children and a pregnant woman were among the 290 passengers. Thirteen years later two airplanes were crashed into the world trade center, near 3000 were killed, again civilians, the whole world lamented for the lost lives and sympathized with the Americans, two wars were followed in Afghanistan and Iraq, thousands were killed and most of them were civilians.
The first impression was not romantic and delightful but the first impression is not always the last one; I became familiar with American literature, with Gone with the Wind as a teenager (though the beauty of the book was shattered and was gone later when I understood the racial tone behind the beautiful story, but I still love it) and with T.S. Eliot's Waste Land which I never understood fully as a teenager but I loved it anyhow.
When I wanted to decide about my MA in American Studies I was very tentative about the decision, some told me that this major is fully political, on the other hand English literature( I got by BA in English literature) did not satisfy me and I was looking for some thing new. American Studies is an interdisciplinary field of study which contains the study of economics, history, literature, art, media, film and woman studies and combines the methodologies of the literary criticism and historical research; the nature of the major like other interdisciplinary fields is colorful and any one can find a subject of his or her interest. As American studies was developed outside of America other aspects were also added and made connection with cultural studies and post colonial studies.
American Studies outside of America I think has its own limitations and even its own advantages. Iranians can not look to America like Americans, this is the case with Japanese, Chinese or the Arabs.

TheUnited States Presidential Election, 2004

The United States Presidential Election, 2004

The United States presidential election in 2004 was held between two presidential candidates John Kerry and George Walker Bush. George Bush gain both popular and electoral vote, though Bush's popular vote had a slim margin compared to that Kerry's. The election was also different from the election of 2000 in which George Bush became the president of the United States with gaining the vote of electoral collage but failed in gaining the popular vote. So what had happened to public opinion that made them to vote for Bush, the same candidate who had failed to gain the popular vote in previous presidential election? Had Bush proved to be a better President during his first term of presidency? Or was it due to his 2003 invasion of Iraq and the importance of foreign policy that led to his victory? Or by comparing the slim difference between the popular votes of the two candidates can we say that the war on terrorism was not that much important or influential in Bush's election?
Before answering to these questions we should know why do people vote they way they do? Some believe that people vote based on party affiliation e.g. they vote to democrats or republicans because they feel a psychological attachment toward one of these parties. Others believe that party affiliation model is out of fashion in recent years and Americans are becoming more sophisticated. By the emergence of new issues, new generation of Americans decide about their future president based on the important issues of the time. Statistics shows that in 1992 presidential election only about 29 per cent of the voters strongly identified with Republicans or Democrats, which is rather a significant decrease compared to 1960s. So, most voters in recent years are said to be independent.
This paper will focus on issue voting theory: that people decide about their future president based on the important issues of the time, though the writer admits issue theory, while being important is not completely responsible in election of a president.
American public usually prefer to focus on domestic issues rather than foreign policy. But in 2004 presidential election foreign policy was the dominant theme in presidential campaigns. The reason for that was U.S. invasion on Iraq which had started in 2003 and had changed Bush to a wartime president; but there were still some controversies around the issue: Bush, the republican candidate and the president of war focused his campaign on national security and presented him as a decisive leader for war against terrorism while Kerry the democrat candidate believed in "stronger at home, respected in world" policy which suggested more attention to domestic affaires. Another important factor was that the election was held only one year after the invasion on Iraq and considering the swift victory of American military forces and relatively few causalities of American troops, Bush had gained more approval rating (which did not last long with failure in finding weapons of mass destruction which was the logic for the war, and long occupation of Iraq which led to mass protests in future years). Bush's approval rate in the month of May rode at 66% to a CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll. Another interesting point is that when American troops are sent out for a war, the commander-in- chief gains more approval and fame inside the country; though this trend is not long lasting and by the time people are becoming aware of heavy casualties or are becoming dissatisfied due to tax increase, the protests are going to start; this was the case in Vietnam War and the war in Iraq. But with respect to the 2004 presidential election, as it was mentioned Americans were still in high sprit with their apparent victory in Iraq and Bush was gaining more fame and popularity for his heroic actions. So, perhaps it can be said that Americans were looking for a president who would continue these heroic actions and glorious victories for a while.

But it is oversimplification to say that the only reason for George Bush's victory in presidential election of 2004 was his foreign policy attitudes. This becomes more problematic when popular votes of the two candidates are compared: Bush gained 62,040,610 popular vote and his rival Kerry gained 59,028,111. As it is clear the difference between the two candidates is not that much significant and so other factors should be taken in to consideration for a more comprehensive conclusion.

References:

http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/elec2004
if (window.runOnloadHook) runOnloadHook();
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._presidential_election_controversy_and_irregularities
Controversies in American Politics& society. Mckey, Houghton&Wroe. Blackwell, 2002.

Social Stratification in America

Social Stratification in America
Social stratification in American Society is not clearly defined or determined; nevertheless social scientist has developed a socio -economic stratification of the American society. Americans believe in a three class society: rich, poor and middle class and most Americans consider themselves as middle class. In reality the American society is more diverse and incongruent and there is an extensive difference among people. The basic determinants that make social class are wealth, education, income and occupation. Some sociologists have divided the American society in six distinct categories including: rich or the upper class, upper middle class, lower middle class, lower class and poor and under class.
It is believed that the people who belong to the same social class share the similar social positions, similar ways of thinking and life styles; others oppose this idea and believe that we cannot generalize characteristic of the people to one another. Social class creates a hierarchy and identity for the people of each class.
One of the indications of the social class in America is income in terms of either individual or household and is one of the most important indicators of social class. Those families who have two income earners are in a better position. Per capita income which means the amount of money allocated to each individual member is also anther important determinant in social stratification. It can be said the families who have fewer members are in a better position.
Another indication in social stratification is education which has a relation with the occupation and income. Higher education itself needs money and paying tuition, so it is clear that most of the time the families who are better off can afford a better education for their children: they can pay for better schools and private schools, colleges and universities. As the result there is an interrelation between money and education.
One of the most prominent features of social class is culture: people of the same social class tend to have similar ways of behavior; though this behavior and culture is not some thing fix and changes with social mobility: people who move upward or downward in their social stratification will acquire the behavior of that social group. But there is diversity inside the same social group as well. One of the important terms in American culture and literature is the concept of "Class Ascendancy": based on this concept each successive generation will have a higher standard of living than its predecessors. Another important characteristic of American social class is achieved status rather than described statues; it means that regardless of his or her original statues, one can become rich and successful and climb the social ladder. But in reality this idealistic view can not be completely true: many people of color are still suffering the racial prejudices and as a result they can not have the proper education and a good occupation which is perhaps the most important class component. These people have lower income and the cycle will continue to the later generations. Despite the existing injustice and inequalities, America is considered land of opportunity, the land which its streets are paved with gold. Thought this belief is exaggerated, Americans have improved their economic situation with their hard working and persistence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_class_in_the_United_States

The White House

"I pray Heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this House, and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof". John Adams, the first American president inhabited in the White house

The White House was built between 1792 and 1800 based on Pierre Charles L'Enfant's plan for a federal city; the plan was chosen in a competition among nine other proposals. It is said that George Washington was not pleased with the primary plan and found it was too small and simple and not suitable for the nation's president, so the White House was enlarged by thirty percent. James Hoban, an Irish architecture, influenced by a palace in Dublin in designed the White House. The construction began in October 13, 1792 by black slaves as well as free workers most of them were Irish and Italian immigrants. The initial construction took eight years and the White House was ready to use in 1800 and was occupied by John Adams. The building was referred to as the "President's Palace" or "Presidential Mansion", but around 1811 it was called the white House by public because the building was painted in white. In 1814 during the war between American and British the White house was burned by British Troops; only the exterior walls remained and they needed reconstruction. British troops also looted the precious objects of the White House which were never returned or recovered except for a painting of George Washington and a jewelry box which was given back to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1939. By the time of the Civil War, the white House was fully established and over crowded. Later it was enlarged and extended which included a National Wing on the east and a west wing which itself included the Oval Office.
In 1948 the house was in a bad condition due to poor maintenance and construction and it was declared that there is an imminent danger of collapse. So the reconstruction and modification was carried out by the command of President Truman which led to adding more new places for workrooms, storage and a bomb shelter. Later Jacqueline Kennedy directed a very extensive redecoration of the house and collected new artifacts for the home including antiques and paintings; other luxuries of the house were added by wealthy donors. Different periods of the republic and world history were selected as theme for each room such as Green Room, Blue Room, yellow oval Room, Treaty Room…. .Since President Kennedy, every presidential family had changed the house according to their taste. But every change has to be approved by the Committee for the preservation of the White House in order to keep the unity and integrity of the house.

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-White-House&id=913079

Pox Americana: Exposing the American Empire

Pox Americana: Exposing the American Empire
About the Authors: John Bellamy Foster is an American journalist, sociologist, essayist and eco-sociologist. He is also editor of Monthly Review, which is a prominent Marxist magazine. He is also a professor of sociology at the University of Oregon.
Robert W.McChesney is a professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Illinois. He has written and edited sixteen books and some journal articles and book reviews. Mc Chesney is also the president and co-founder of Free-Press, which is a national media reform organization.

Synopsis:
U.S. current wars makes the observer to wonder whether there exist any similarity and link between new imperialism and the old one in19 century in the U.S. history. In 1898, with Spanish-American war and seizure of Spanish colonies in Caribbean, America emerged as a world power. By refusing to accept the existence of the new Philippine Republic, United - States publicly announced its intention to annex it entirely, and declare it a holy mission.
This part, the "Imperial Ambition" opens with an interview with Noam Chomsky and his opinion about American use of military force which is declared as "The national Security Strategy of the United Sates of America, which permits the use of force in the world. In this way U.S. would rule the world by force, and if there is a challenge against it U.S. will have the right to destroy the challenge before it becomes a treat; Chomsky calls this doctrine preventive war and not preemptive war and makes distinction between thee two: preventive war begins with no grounds in international law. The challenge, the treat can be invented or imagined and is not proven or evident. The point is that America calls it a new norm; to do this America has to select a defenseless target e.g. Afghanistan and Latter Iraq; and to prepare the stage for such wars they had to frighten American people that Bin laden or Saddam Hussein are a treat to their existence.
American imperialism has deep roots in its history and has close relationship with perception of white supremacy and racism. This ideology can be traced back to Christian Crusades, latter colonization of African countries and Latin America. The Declaration of Independence and latter the American constitution confirms this supremacy. Regarding U.S. -Indian treaties, white supremacy was the rationalization and ideology behind theft of Native American lands. So, the very origins of the United States are imperialistic.
Imperialism is an integral part of the capitalist world economy. In 1945 U.S. nation state became so strong and hegemonic and had military force which was unparalleled; as a result of the hegemonic power America also became culturally the center of the world. But around 1968 with the rise of economic rivals, U.S. defeat in Vietnam and world revolution, America's power and hegemony over the world began to decline. So, in order to keep their hegemony over the world, American leaders had two approaches: to persuade Western Europe, Japan and others they can have an alliance of semi- equal with the U.S. though America is the leader of them all; the second approach was called Washington Consensus: to substituted developmenalism with globalization and set out to impose this on the world. America at that period had three objectives: 1. The Counteroffensive of neoliberalism, 2. to deal with military treats and 3. To stop the European Union. After 9/11, which showed that U.S. was vulnerable the hawks entered the scene and diplomatic, multicultural approach was put aside. The war on Iraq was not for overthrowing a dictator or even for oil but to show that American could do it and intimidate both the people of the third world countries not to engage in nuclear proliferation and Europeans.
The imperialism practiced by few rich capitalist had dividend the world into rich and poor nations. The rich countries become richer by using poor counties resources. At the same time the imperialist nations of the world are competing with each other to extend their power over these resources; this completion is called geopolitics. These imperialist nations are not homogenous in their power and their completion some times leads to war. Out of this an imperial power will arise that will dictate and impose its own rule over other nations. America has been the hegemonic power since the Second World War. America's supremacy is partly due to possessing the world's primary currency. United States is willing to use its military force to keep its global hegemony whenever it is needed. But a global left, most of whom are socialist, are opposing American global program.
European countries and their Japanese counter parts are tiring to find ways to catch up with United States. The assumption is that U.S. economy more energetic and successful for its free enterprise nature and Europe's and Japan's old ways can not survive in the new order. But this assumption is not true. They fail to see that U.S. growth in 1990s was financed by borrowing from overseas (as America is the world's largest multicultural conglomerates). Despite this foreigners continue lend money to Americans because it is so productive. Anyhow Americans have a relative dominance over world's economy due to this flow of capital from Europe itself and the rest of the world. The reason why European nations were against the war in Iraq is that in this America will expand its domination over oil fields and intends to grant gigantic tax cuts to the richest of fellow Americans and at the same time boost governmental spending through defense budget.
But there is always struggle and resistance against imperialism in the history. The most significant movement against imperialism has taken place in the poor countries and the third world. The resistant groups are also active in America: a broad antiwar movement led to ending war in Vietnam. Though the term "war on terrorism" has persuaded many people that the war in Iraq is for defending American's right, nevertheless justice movement are still active and alive; these movements are a sort of mass social phenomenon which can lay the foundation for an anti-imperialist movement. But there must be an organized left presence to tie different movements and strands together.
For organizing an anti-war movement there is a need to gather all the help from contradictory objectives. So the movement needs to mobilize and combine the organizational resources and strategic potential of the labor movement, particularly the new generation of global justice activist; but the paradox here is that this goal is universal and internationalist while class power is reproduced nationally. To solve the problem a left movement should locate itself within both labor movement and other movements in the first world and to understand the old issue of state power in a new internationalist way in order to help to third world struggle.
*****
This book contains 15 essays on different aspects of American Imperialism which contains the leading left-wing and leading Marxist annalist of imperialism to examine the nature and prospects of U.S policy. Each essay is written by important figures that are critical toward Bush administration. In part one, US imperialism has long History: Noam Chomsky, Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, John Bellamy Foster, Harry Magdoff, Robert McChesney and Immanuel Wallerstien have contributed to the part. Part two, Geopolitics and Political Economy of US Imperialism is written by William K Tabb, Klare and others. Part three, Resistance are written by samir Amin, Barbara Epstien, Bernardine Dohhen and... Although the book is written by many writers and contributors, yet the editors were able to gather all essays together without losing the coherence. The essays are organized in a way that gives the reader an understandable view about the history of imperialism in U.S. The book tries to be comprehensive but it has its own shortcomings: the solutions given by writers for confronting imperialism are superficial and simplistic and it has its roots in Marxist ideology of the essayists; Pox Americana puts so much emphasize on the role of labor movement and working class.
Pox Americana: Exposing the American Empire
Reviewed by Zeinab Ghasemi
By John Bellamy Foster & Robert W MachesneyYear of publication: 2004City of publication: United Kingdom Paper cover, 192pageLanguage: EnglishISBN: 0-7453-2357-X
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Zeinab_Ghasemi_Tari

Human Rights in the United States

Human Rights in the United States

The United States is considered one of the most liberal and the freest states of the world. The U.S. constitution and treaties ratified by the senate and congress is the base of human rights of the Americans and is praised by many people around the world as a model of democracy and freedom. Freedom of speech, Freedom of press, freedom of religion, the right to bear arms, freedom from cruel and unusual punishment including torture and the right to a fair trial are bases of Americans bill of right. American governments also try to impose human rights in other countries by interfering in their affairs. But what is this American version of human rights?
The United States has refused to seat in the United Nation Human Rights Council since 2006 by claiming that it has lost its credibility with repeated attacks toward Israel's policy and failure to confront other right abusers. U.S. has violated the so called human rights both inside and outside of its country whenever and wherever it served their interest or was against their benefit. This trend is seen in U.S. policy and has been intensified since September eleven and the war on terrorism both inside and outside of America and their excuse for such an attitude is national security.
United States government has suspended various rights on national security ground in different situations and the most significant example is the current War against Terror and after 9/11 attacks. In some cases the suspension has gone too far that has led to the same terror and tyranny which Americans claim to fight with. Here are just a few examples to illuminate the American violation of human rights and its double standard policies:
The United Nation Human Right Council released a report in 2006 that revealed U.S. citizens and foreign national are occasionally captured and transferred to secret places and prisons; these people are tortured, abused and humiliated. Guantanamo Bay camp and Abu Ghraib are symbols of American human right violation:
"In the almost six years since Guantanamo opened, only one person has been convicted of any crime and that was by plea agreement." said a senior counsel on counterterrorism. Of the 305 detainees held in Guantanamo, only three are subject to military commission charges. In 2004, the photos revealed from Abu Ghraib showing humiliation and abuse of the prisoners which led to a political scandal. On the other while International and U.S. law prohibits torture and ill-treatment of any person in custody, U.S. governments claim that this law is not applied to what they call "unlawful combatants" and U.S. personnel acting outside the Unite States. Based on this claim the privileges of prison of war are not applicable to detainees in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. The detainees of these prisons are kept for an infinite time and generally do not receive any trials. The point is that United Nation Human Rights Council has no legal authority or power to stop the United States and as it was mentioned before U.S. has refused to seat on United Nation Human Rights council.
America is responsible for many crimes and wars around the world and has engaged in other countries affairs accusing them for violation of human rights; America claims that all its actions and practices are for expansion of democracy and freedom and for respecting human dignity; America is considered by many people as a leader and model for freedom. But U.S. claim of human right is biased and is dependent on the benefit and interest of American government.

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_and_the_United_States http://www.hrw.org/doc/?t=usa
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Zeinab_Ghasemi_Tari

Capital punishment in America and Controversies

Capital punishment in America and Controversies




Capital punishment is one of the controversial issues in America and other countries. While capital punishment is obsolete in most of the developed countries of the world, U.S. still practices death penalty in most of its states and has the support of public opinion; there are organizations and groups who are for or against it and each of them have its own justifications based on moral, religious and emotional grounds.
Death penalty was reinstated in 1976 and continues to its existence in 21st century. 67% of capital conviction is overturned, seven percent of those whose sentences were overturned have been acquitted, and ten percent were re-sentenced to death. The reminder ends up with lesser sentences.

Historical Back ground
Capital punishment has been a lawful punishment since the colonial period in America and was considered a normal part of judicial process. Death penalty was prescribed for major crimes; but from the beginning death penalty was only used and practiced when there was no other way for punishing the criminal. The reform movement toward death penalty began in 1750's in Europe by academics such as Cesare Beccaria and Voltaire. This movement was influential in Europe and ended capital punishment in 1767. In America some intellectual were also affected by the movement. They argued that death penalty should be abolished as a cruel act and they defended life imprisonment as a more rational way. As a result of these efforts, in 19th century Michigan was the first state that abolished death penalty; however most states still practiced death penalty for certain crimes.
Capital punishment has gone through different stages in 20 century: during the progressive era before the First World War, six more states banned capital punishment. During 1920s through 1940s a number of states reinstated death penalty which led to an increase in number of execution. In 1930 up to 1945 this increase was even greater. From 1950s to mid-1970s the approach toward capital punishment changed again which was as a result of advancement of liberal ideas. In this period the trend was toward judicial challenges to the constitutionality of the death penalty. In 1976 Gregg v. Georgia reinstated the use of capital punishment in American states.


Legal Process
The legal process for the death penalty in the Unites States is complicated and includes four stages: 1. Sentencing, 2. Direct review, 3. State collateral Review and 4. Federal Habeas Corpus. Recently a fifth stage has been included and is becoming an important process: 5. Section 1983 Challenge which is a clemency or pardon in which the governor or president of jurisdiction can unilaterally reduce a death sentence.
Each of these stages is going to be explained briefly:

Direct Review:
If a defendant is sentenced to death at the trial level, the case goes to direct review. In this process an appellate court examines the evidence presented in the trial court and decides whether the decision was legally right or not: if the appellate court finds no significant legal errors in capital punishment sentence, the judgment will be affirmed; if significant legal errors are discovered then the judgment will reverse; and if the appellate court finds that no reasonable could find defiant eligible for death penalty, which is very rare, then the defendant will be acquitted.

State Collateral review:
When a death sentence is affirmed on direct review, supplemental methods e.g. collateral review remain to attack and change final judgment. When the defendant receives his death sentence in the state level trial, the first stage is State Collateral Review. This process varies from state to state. The purpose of these proceedings is to create a chance for the prisoner to change the final judgment.

Federal habeas corpus
After a death sentence is affirmed in State Collateral Review, the prisoner may apply for Federal Habeas Corpus, which is a kind of lawsuit that can be brought in federal courts; here the prisoner can attack a death sentence in federal court. The purpose of federal habeas corpus is to ensure that state courts have done a reasonable job in protecting defendant's constitutional right.
Section 1983 contested
If the federal courts refuse to issue a writ of habeas corpus, the Governor may set an execution date. In recent years the prisoner can postpone the execution through a final round of federal litigation using the Civil Right Act of 1871. The United States Supreme Court approved the use of Section 1983 as a way for challenging a states method of execution a cruel and unusual punishment in violation of Eight Amendment.

Controversies over the Use of Capital Punishment
Different groups and parties support or oppose the use of death penalty and each of them has its own moral and religious justification. In America the majority of public opinion supports death penalty. Religious groups have different opinions about it: more conservative groups tend to support capital punishment while those who are more liberal are inclined to oppose it. The debate and controversies are around several issues; those who oppose it claim that: is it morally correct to kill another human being even if he is a criminal? Can death penalty be used as a deterrent to avoid more crimes? Is capital punishment used fairly across racial, social and economic classes? And what if an innocent person is found guilty and executed and new evidence in future reveals the improper judgment?
Until 1960s it was assumed that capital punishment was permitted by Fifth Amendment, eight Amendment and fourteen Amendment. However some Activists and movements tired to reform the process and its shortcomings: they believed that the rules which were applied to criminals differed wildly from state to state; they also argued that gas chambers and electrocution violated the eight Amendment as a cruel and unusual way of execution. In 1972 the Supreme Court concluded that capital punishment is a cruel and unusual punishment and in Furman v. Georgia the court struck down the capital punishment as a violation of the Eight Amendment. The Furman decision stopped all execution in the United States at least temporarily but did not abolish it completely. In 1976 the court clarified the decision. In Gregg v. Georgia the court argued that Gregg, convicted of robbery and murder, could be executed only if the jury considered both aggravating and mitigating circumstances. This decision established the constitutionality of Capital punishment. This decision argued that if the juries consider all circumstances of every individual and investigate it properly then ultimate death penalty is acceptable.

http://ezinearticles.com/?Capital-Punishment-In-America-and-Controversies&id=911661

The American Identity: Polarization vs. Unity

The American Identity: Polarization vs. Unity?

Immigration and American identity

The political activity that pervades the United States must be seen in order to be understood. No sooner do you set foot upon American ground than you are stunned by a kind of tumult. ... It is impossible to spend more effort in the pursuit of happiness.
—Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy America

Is American identity deteriorating due to huge waves of immigrants to this country or will it continue to its existence despite the fact? Before answering to this question it is crucial to know what is identity is: identity is defined the way individuals label themselves as members of particular groups (nation, social class, subculture, ethnicity, gender, etc.). As the definition suggest the concept of identity for a nation is not simple and it becomes more complex in multicultural societies like that of America.
while most of the American population are immigrants from all countries of the world it is interesting to know what keeps Americans together despite diversity of races, ethnicities, cultures, languages and religions?
It is believed that Americans are hold together by a unified identity that makes them to identify themselves as Americans rather than Hispanic, Black, Mexican or Chinese. Being fully an American citizen does not need an ancestral linkage to the nation e.g. to be originally from America. Americans believe in "self- made man" and self creation, in individualism, in liberty and equality of opportunities and self- expression. These values go beyond any specific culture, religion or ethnicity. So, people from all countries can be American by accepting and practicing American values and culture. America is said to be a melting pot that people of all colors and cultures are mixing together; this mixture can be seen in American daily life in borrowing and intermingling different styles, rituals, foods and customs. Of course it is over simplification to think that all minority groups experience America like WASP- white Anglo Saxon protestant- the tragic experiences of Native Americans, Blacks, Chinese and other minority groups testifies the existence of discrimination and racism in America, but it is supposed that minorities in America are enjoying a better standard of living and civil rights compared to other countries. Reformists and civil right movements tried to change the situation and create equality for different racial groups. While it is argued that even in 21st century there still exist inequalities and discrimination in American societies, others believe that each generation of Americans has moved toward acceptance of different people, opinions, religions, cultures and even languages.
Contemporary immigration especially in the last three decades has changed the demographic pattern of immigration of the U.S.: before 1970's most Americans were categorized simply as black and white; but now America is more racially, culturally and linguistically diverse. Most of the recent immigrants to America are Asian and Latino. There are also intermarriages between people of color and whites which deepens the roots of immigrant in society. On the other hand Hispanics or Asian has higher birth rate compared to white Americans and it is highly probable that they will gain the majority of the U.S. population in the years to come.
Diversity of races and ethnicities in America raise the concerns and anxieties over the future of unity and American identity. What will happen to the future of America and American values and culture? How the immigrants who enter U.S. with different identities, languages and cultures are incorporated and melt in American society? Do they try to assimilate to the new culture or try to keep there own cultural heritage? Does the division of American society widens or America will continue its existence as it was?
It is difficult answer to these questions. American history has shown that different ethnicities and groups had tried to incorporate to American society- no matter what their origins were. Some are optimist about the future of American identity; they think that citizens of the U.S. have so much commonality that would keep them together. They believe that the very concept of polarization and disunity would give rise to movements to keep the nation's unity. Today American media plays an important role in creating a sense of unity among people of different races and ethnicities. Many talk shows or soap operas try to use actors, entertainers or hosts that are not white; they are people of color with different origins but despite their differences they all have one goal: to propagate American values and cultures and to create a sense of common experience of being an American. But there are still others who believe that the new trend of immigration to the U.S. as it was mentioned is significantly different from the former generations and eventually would lead to the disunity of American nation.

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-American-Identity---Polarization-VS-Unity&id=901584

The Nightmare of Life in Death

Film Review: DEAD MAN
Title: Dead Man
Date of Release: May 26, 1995
Directed and Written: Jim Jarmusch
Genre: Western
Main Characters: Johnny Depp, Gary Farmer, Lance Henriksen, Michael Wincott and John Hurt.

The Nightmare of Life in Death

Plot:
William Blake arrives in the town of Machine, in extreme western frontier of America, to work in a factory as an accountant; but he has arrived one month late and he losses the job. In the first night of his arrival in the town, Blake meets a young girl and stays with her for the night but the girl's former fiancé who is the son of Machine's Metal Works Company comes and Blake kills him in self-defense and gets wounded. Next day he wakes up and meets Nobody who is an out cast Indian; he believes that Blake is the dead English poet. They go to a journey to" the other side" and on their way they go through different experiences and adventures which finally lead to their death. The journey transforms William Blake into a cold blooded killer.
Setting: the film is set in late 19th century, in extreme western frontier of America.
Genre: Western, Drama
Main Characters: Johnny Depp (William Blake), Gary Farmer (Nobody), Mili Avital (Thel Russell), Lance Henriksen (Cole Wilson), Michael Wincott (Conway Twill).

The Film Opens with a quote from the French surrealist poet Henri Michaux: "It is preferable not to travel with a dead man." , so from the beginning the audience knows that he is watching a highly metaphorical film. The names of the two main characters, William Blake (a long- dead English poet) and Nobody, are metaphorical as well. Both characters are searching and struggling for their identities: Blake has lost his family and takes the road to west in search of a place where he can start a new life. William Blake is a name of an English poet who was isolated from the society for protesting against the hypocrisy of British institutions. Jarmusch said he has used his name because Blake's name reminds him of Native Americans in their mystical visions. Nobody, as his name suggests have no identity and feels no sense of belonging to his native land and is rejected both by Whites and his own people. So, he does not exist and seems to be invisible.
Contrary to American's perception about the west as land of opportunity and abundance and western movies that put an emphasis on this false vision, the Dead Man portraits western land as a barren place where anarchic, cruel and primitive white man ruling.

The techniques:
The whole film is shot in black and white. In an interview Jarmusch said that he had used this technique in order to neutralize the familiarity of the objects and landscape. Also the emotional theme and tone of the story demands it: the story is full of violence and sense of morbidity and barrenness which is in contrast with American's perception about the west. The black and white shooting also reminds the audience the Film Noire of the 1940s an50s.
Dead man also uses the fade-out technique which was used in older films to show the division between the scenes. In the film this technique is also used to show a sense of isolation between the different parts of the films and the physical status of the main character William Blake, whose health is deteriorating.
The music of the film is written and performed by Neil Young and is played by an electric guitar. The music is said to be played by him spontaneously as he watch the film.

Symbols and Metaphors
The film is full of symbols and metaphors both in scenes and speeches of the characters. As the train moves deeper in the western territories the landscape becomes harsher, and the passengers more uninviting and wild. What Blake sees when he walks in the Machine town for the first time, are all symbols of death: coffins, skulls and skins. There are other symbols and metaphors in the film such as the gun kept under the pillow by Thel, and when Blake asks why she keeps it she answers: "coz this is America." Also the importance of tobacco in western culture is shown when repeatedly almost all characters of the film asks for it .As time passes Blake lose his glasses and watch which shows his separation from his former life and civilization.

Conclusion
The dead Man is one of the best western films which try to break the western movies cliché: This west is not land of opportunity, success and fertility but land of fear, brutality and barrenness. One may argue that the film is exaggerated in portraying the dark and ugly side of the American west, but I think the film is unique in that sense.

References
http://www.sover.net/~ozus/index.htm
http://www.univie.ac.at/Anglistik/easyrider/data/pages/deadman/deadman3.htm
http://imdb.com/title/tt0112817/usercomments-242

The American Mind

The American Mind

An Interpretation of American Thought and Character since 1880's
By: Henry Steele Commager

Details:
Paperback: 487 pages
Publisher: Yale University Press (September 10, 1959)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0300000464
ISBN-13: 978-0300000467
Reviewed By: Fatemeh Azimzadeh Moosavi
Zeinab Ghasemi Tari

About the Author: Henry Steele Commager was born in 1902 in Pennsylvania. He studied at the University of Chicago. By the time he was 28, he got his PhD on the Danish philosopher and reformer Johann Struensee. After a while he changed his research field and interest concentrating on American history. He was also a co-author of some American historical books.
One of his most significant books was written in 1950, a monograph, The American Mind: An Interpretation of American Thought and character since the 1880's. He was an intellectual and cultural historian but also he had some work in the fields of constitutional and political history. He believed that historians must consider a wider audience as well as specialists on history.
Commager died in 1998 at age 95 of pneumonia.
Review and Criticism:
Henry Steele Commager uses the work of philosophers, clergymen, novelist, poets, journalist, sociologist and politician theorists and their interpretation to interpret the American mind. As the recitation of Santayana in the beginning of the book says "to be an American is itself almost a moral condition, an education, and a career." The American mind was written after the Second World War, the blooming years of American power and influence politically, culturally and even ideologically across the world; Commager himself believed in America's role as a great democracy model which preserved the future of the world and that started by joining the World War II against Nazi Germany and as a result the U.S. was the unique super power before the cold war. So, the American mind was framed in such a way to fulfill the American dream which was both believable and achievable.
American dream was important to Henry Steele Commager as the core of the book. American dream puts emphasis on United States as a special nation which is chosen by God and has a special mission to accomplish. This term generally can be defined as existence of opportunity and freedom for all citizens to achieve their goals and become wealthy and successful by their individual hard work; so class, caste, race or ethnicity are not considered as obstacles in the process of progress. The majority of the book is a description of cultural transformation and development of late 19th to early 20th century especially about how pragmatism developed in America. Commager's thesis is that American's motto is pragmatism which is based on DeTocqueville's emphasis on American practicality compared to European's abstractions. The thinkers who believe on pragmatism consider practical consequences or real effect to be vital components of both meaning and truth. The book also focuses on scientific and political aspect and reactions to social Darwinism.
Commager writes "American thought owes so much to English and European though and I have attempted to distinguish what are its American forms, characteristics, idioms and idiosyncrasies. In a sense this book is study in comparative culture and history." Then having a lot in common and while the origins are the same, the comparison of the American and European history leads to highlighting what Commager mentioned as the American character of the quoted ones. Commager thought American character and trait is flexible and more adaptable compared to Europeans.
In his book Commager elaborates that the decade of 1890 is the watershed in U.S. moral, economical and intellectual history; in this period some old certainties began to break down by the fast move of science and the creation of new philosophies.
The weak points of the book are that the writer tries to cover social, economic and literary issues of the mentioned era in relatively hurried way and moves rapidly to other fields. The subjects covered in this book are scattered and could be better organized. The terminology used in this book needs more explanation and some concepts remain ambiguous and needs more clarification. Another important point is lack of an introduction and conclusion which discourages the reader, especially for such a thick book (476 pages) which requires providing the reader with a short and comprehensive frame. Despite the shortcomings and faults, the book provides the reader with information about pragmatism, social Darwinism and American radicalism and literary movement.

Reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Steele_Commager
http://www.rinr.fsu.edu/fallwinter99/features/commager.html
http://www.commager.org/
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Commager.html

NIE Report: an Iranian Victory?!

NIE Report: an Iranian Victory?!
(AFP) - The US intelligence community came under fire over the weekend on two fronts, as conservatives criticized a recent CIA report on Iran's nuclear program and the Justice Department announced a probe into the agency's destruction of videotapes showing interrogations of terror suspects. The intelligence services are still trying to restore their credibility following the debacle over alleged weapons of mass destruction in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, the main justification for the US-led 2003
invasion.http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news
Last week, U.S. National intelligence Estimate released a report that concluded Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program four years ago and CIA has found no evidence of a secret nuclear program. While the some of the Iranian rejoiced the recent report and considered it as a victory others did not have that much positive view about it, considering the intensification of US and their European's allies in their efforts against Iran and sudden revelation of the report.
The positive side of NIE report, believed by some Iranian politicians perhaps is that it will subvert America's coercive policy and an impending war on Iran; also it would encourage Russia and China to resist new UN sanctions as well as relaxation of America's European allies on financial restrictions. These people believe that the report would path the way for negotiation and dialogue between the two countries.
Others believe that the positive side of NIE report is exaggerated and the report should be approach with more care and attention. While NIE launched its report and declared that Iran has stopped its nuclear weapons program, Bush declared that U. S. policy toward Iran has not changed and America still considers Iran as a treat to world's peace. His statements were accompanied by U.S secretary of State Rice, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Dick Cheney. U.S government insisted that Iran must stop enriching Uranium and clarify its nuclear activities. What was revealed by NIE was reported by IAEA and the same thing had happened for Saddam regime; the reports had confirmed that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and despite all these reports America attacked Iraq. Anyway U.S. government has declared that this report has not change their policy toward Iran.
Reference
http://news.yahoo.com/
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search
http://www.csmonitor.com

Peace Conference, Annapolis

WASHINGTON - Just 24 hours after securing an agreement between Israeli and Palestinian leaders to resume long-stalled peace talks, President Bush invited the pair to the White House to ceremonially inaugurate the first formal, direct negotiations in seven years. Bush planned to meet separately with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and finally to get them together for an afternoon session and declaring the talks formally under the wayاhttp://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news?

Sixty years after occupation of Palestinian territories by Israel several "Peace Conferences" had been held in Madrid, Oslo, Camp David and other places in an effort to solve the problem and they have all turned out to be failure.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has always played an active role in Palestine problem and has declared that the issue of Palestine is the one of the most important issues of all Islamic nations. Tehran has proposed referendum with participation of all Palestinians including Muslims, Christians and Jews to decide their own destiny. Iranian leaders also believe that security of the Middle East region should be decided within the region and not by pro-Israel Europeans and Americans. So Iranians have declared that Annapolis conference is not representing the Palestinians and is moving against their rights. While both Palestinians and Israelis are looking for a solution to the problem but a majority of them are also suspicious that the peace conference will bear any fruit.
On the other hand Americans believe that the conference is welcomed by many Sunni Arabs Muslims because they prefer Americans interference to stop the rising regional influence of Iran and Islamic radicalism. So every body at Annapolis has one common goal to provide a relative protection against Iranian increasing influence in the region.

IAEA Says Iran Cooperating, But Not Enough

IAEA Says Iran Cooperating, But Not Enough

November 23, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- The UN's nuclear watchdog is due to wrap up a meeting today to discuss its latest report on Iran's nuclear program.
Speaking at the meeting in Vienna on November 22, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Muhammad el-Baradei, said he cannot be sure Tehran has declared all of its nuclear material and activities to inspectors, despite what he says is Iran's increased openness about its past programs."Our progress over the past two months has been made possible by an increased level of cooperation on the part of Iran, in accordance with the work plan," el-Baradei said. "However, I would continue to urge Iran to be more proactive in providing information, and in accelerating the pace of this cooperation, in order for the agency to be able to clarify all major remaining outstanding issues by the end of the year."El-Baradei's statement underlined the impasse that remains between the IAEA and Tehran, despite what both sides say has been increased cooperation in recent months. The recent report of El-Baradei states that Iran has not provided necessary answers to the existing ambiguities surrounding Iran's nuclear program. But there is no evidence to prove that Iran is trying to achieve weapons of mass destruction. The report notes that while Iran has been candid about its early procurement of material and equipment for enriching uranium, it still allows inspectors access only to sites they already know about.
Following El-baradei's report on Iran's nuclear program, Solana should report to the UN Security council at the end of the November on Iran's cooperation with IAEA. The two reports would be used as the basis for decision on Iran's nuclear program by Security Council's five permanent members and Germany. Russia and China may support Iran's nuclear programs and try to postpone a third sanctions debate.

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/11/97576539-61c2-4dac-b96f-33c9772ed099.html

Iran in Dilemma

Iran in Dilemma
WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 — The World Bank, newly caught up in the Bush administration’s campaign against Iran, has had to suspend payments for earthquake relief, sanitation and other projects there in response to new American sanctions on leading Iranian banks, World Bank officials say. American officials said they hoped that the decision by the World Bank would increase pressure on Iran.
"New sanctions are against Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps and some Iranian banks, accusing them of supporting terrorism and providing banking services to support nuclear activities.The sanctions blacklist 22 Iranian government agencies, three state-owned banks, as well as individuals, in an attempt to force Tehran to stop its nuclear programme and control its "terrorist" activities."
These new sanctions can be approached from two perspectives: sanctions as an alternative way to avoid military engagement; this means at least for now United States is not going to war with Iran, or as a process which prepares the stage for more sever actions, e.g. military action, as it did happen in Iraq. But to what extend these sanctions are going to be effective? Some consider these sanctions to be unilateral step by America which lacks collective action by other countries. America have maintained its sanctions against Iran since Islamic Revolution in 1979, and Iranians refer to this repeatedly to show that these sanctions are not going to be effective . So America hopes to persuade his European allies and other important countries such as China and Russia to join him to reach a consensus, which will set the stage for a resolution in Security Council in a third round of UN sanctions. These sanctions might have serious consequences for Iran. These sanctions will also have some internal consequences : it would lead to more unemployment and inflation and rise dissatisfaction among ordinary people. It seems that Iranians have to reconsider their policies. This is Iran's dilemma: for years they have propaganda that they are not after weapons of mass destruction and want it for peaceful purposes, that nuclear energy is necessary for Iran's future development. So they have prepared public opinion for this purpose and any retract or retreat is sign of country's weakness.