"Is your mutual fund funding genocide?" - Save Darfur Coalition Ad

In today's Chronicle on the front page of the Business section, there is an article called, "When Business and Politics Bang Heads: Save Darfur Coalition takes on Franklin Templeton."

Franklin Templeton is a huge, San Mateo based mutual fund company that is an affiliate of China National Petroleum Corp., the affiliate infamous for being the main source of revenue which enables the Sudanese government to continue the slaughtering and displacement of civilians in the Darfur region.

While the spokeswoman for the Save Darfur Coalition is quoted saying, "we tried to engage all of these companies privately [Franklin Templeton, JPMorgan, Fidelity Investments, Capital Group, Vanguard], " the Coalition has recently become more aggressive in their campaign to persuade divestment of the blood-stained stock. In response to these efforts, Franklin Templeton issued a statement saying that while they can appreciate the calls for divestment, they assert that "fostering economic and business development through investment in troubled regions can often help in achieving reform."

This disregard towards their participation in the killings prompted Save Darfur Coalition to release various billboards, internet/television ads to put a not-so-flattering spotlight on the investment firms.


What do you think of the ad?
Do you think these divestment campaigns are worth the time, effort, and resources of Darfur activists?
If you had stock in PetroChina, do you think it would be worth the divestment?

Obama refuses to wear an American Flag pin

Just in the news today, Obama, a front-runner candidate for the Democratic Party, voiced that the would not wear the American flag pin (that many politicians do) on the outside of his coat. Many politicians wear this because it shows their dedication to our country and their partriotic beliefs. However, Obama claims that this pin demonstrates "fake patriotism" that isn't "from the heart." He states: “I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest. Instead, I’m going to try to tell the American people what I believe, what will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism.”

A link to the full article is here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/us/politics/05obama.html

There has been much debate as to whether he is being unpatriotic or whether his views are unrealistic.
Do you agree or disagree with him?
Do you think that this will affect any future decisions made by voters during this election? How can something so minor like this affect something SO HUGE (the election)?

I think that Obama should just wear the pin to appease those who oppose him; it is such a simple thing to do. What is there to lose in wearing it?

Summary of Classes 9/28 to 10/4 (H block)

Much of this summary is identical as the other block which Melanie summarized. However, I’ll still give a small summary just for the H blockers as well as some notes I took down from the discussions that we had in class.

9/28: Students were asked to bring in their selected book for the book project. In the beginning of class, Ms Finn briefly told us about the dictatorship in Myanmar. One class member then went on (a small tangent) to discuss the word “dictator” and what it meant to him compared to what it meant to his parents. The term “American exceptionalism” then came up, which is used to describe the idea of Americans seeing themselves as different than everyone else. After the small discussion, we dispersed and reviewed several New York Times primary source articles, which were all about the Armenian Genocide. Something that was interesting to me was that the articles all seemed to be written as if it were in a very distant land that didn’t really pertain or connect with the American readers. Also, often the articles were a small column on the page, and were never accompanied with photographs. Lastly, we divided back into groups and each person shared what they had learned from the articles about “denial” from the websites we viewed a couple of classes previously.

10/2: Similarly to the other block, the first half of class was spent discusses the decision to remove the video clip from the blog. Many opinions were shared, and a common trend between everyone’s comments was that we were often torn between the “freedom of speech” concept as well as preserving the validity and respect of the class blog for outside viewers. The general consensus was that the decision to remove the video clip from the class blog was valid, however, what was more important was the discussions and comments from the students. The concepts of “intention” and whether our class and the class blog is always looking at all perspectives or not, or do we always have a biased slant on everything. Connections were made to whether postings of HATE.com clips, or a humor clip about 9/11 would be allowed to be on the blog or not. The largest gray zone in this discussion was finding the line between humor and “making fun” of such events as the Holocaust or 9/11, and in what circumstances is it appropriate? The last half of class was spent reading the “Never Again” reading, outside in the sunshine!

10/4: Today, we had a speaker named Naira, who was a descendant of a survivor of the Armenian Genocide. Her grandfather had barely escaped, since he had dressed up as a worker, and escaped in a stowaway cart. Her grandmother’s story was a bit different since she was a Protestant Iranian, and so when the soldiers came knocking at her door, she was sparred since she wasn’t a Catholic Christian. Naira grew up in an Armenian school in San Francisco, and described her experiences of singing songs about rebelling against the Young Turks. She also showed us a portion of a documentary film that she made using the interview transcripts of her grandfather when he was interviewed many years ago. Afterwards, she gave us a brief summary of the Armenian Genocide and background of the Armenians as a people, from 6th c. B.C. to April 24th, 1915, the national memorial day of the genocide, since it was the day when the Turks rounded up the most intelligent and influential leaders and artists, and killed them one by one all in one day. Since some of this information was review for us, the more interesting aspect of her presentation was her own personal additions from her grandfather’s story, to how the genocide has effected her and her entire family and culture. It was great to be able to have a more personal account to be able to see the effects of genocide in a more tangible light.

We are now continuing to read our selected books and prepare for the reading log due next Wednesday, Oct. 10th.

Good luck everyone and have a fabulous weekend!

10 Peacekeepers in Killed in DARFUR

If you can all click on this link...
http://action.savedarfur.org/campaign/savedarfur_auattacks/ixwg87u91eie8de?


...it will take you to a website where, if you look on the right hand side, you'll see a section called "Take Action on this Issue."

Then, after you fill in your name and stuff and click "Send This Message," which means you've basically signed an ePetition urging Bush and the UN-Secretary General Ban to get more peacekeepers in Darfur before any more killings occur.

*Also: In the top right corner, there's a box where you can sign up for updates. That way, you'll receive notice whenever there are new petitions to sign or other ways to get involved.

Thanks guys!

Rwandan Genocide and the Definition of Genocide

Hello,
Recently, the Rwandan genocide has been in the news again as Desire Munyaneza is being tried in Canada for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. On Tuesday, (October 2nd) Senator Romeo Dallaire, who was a UN general in charge of the efforts to aid Rwanda, testified against Munyaneza, who was a leader in the Interahamwe militia. He was in charge of a series of roadblocks in Butare where killings occurred. The article can be found here.
The article states that one of the reasons for Dallaire's testimony is that "prosecutors must establish Munyaneza took part in a 'widespread or systematic attack' directed at a particular ethnic group to prove genocide and crimes against humanity, according to the untested 2000 Canadian war crimes law." Given the videos we have watched with Allan Ryan and Samantha Power on defining genocide, comment on this definition. How would a court establish "widespread," not necessarily in this case but in gneral? Also, should people be convicted of different crimes according to their level of inolvement in a genocide, or should genocide remain one crime that is quantified by counts of genocide? Or, as we talked about in regards to Lemkin's efforts, should intent be of more value than any other quantiying factor?

The Last Rotation in Summary

This past Rotation we covered issues of denial, media coverage of genocide, and we began to prepare for our debate.

9/28: We looked at newspaper articles from The New York TImes that covered the Armenian genocide and noted trends in the articles. We then split into groups to discuss the areas of denial that we covered and to read our letters to the editor about Ahmadinejad. Some class members also participated in petitioning for media coverage of Darfur in the San Francisco Chronicle.

10/2: Prior to this class meeting, Ms. Finn had removed the youtube video of "modern-day Hitler" rapping. We discussed issues of censorship and of appropriate material for our blog, keeping in mind that others besides our class see the blog, including speakers that come to our class who may be descendants of genocide victims. Some also expressed opinions and concerns, asserting that this blog is run by us and we should be able to control what is posted and removed.
We also read "Never Again?" to get background for our upcoming debate and to get more information about the Genocide Convention. Then we watched two short clips - one of Allan Ryan and one of Samantha Powers - and discussed the definition of genocide according to numbers.

10/4: Today we went over citation formatting. Afterwards, we discussed Senate committees and the process required to get a bill passed to be voted on by the House. Then we met in our separate option groups to prepare for our debate.

LINGERING QUESTIONS
1) How can genocide be detected in war time? How can war be used to cover genocide?
2) What is appropriate for the blog? When do we cross the line (such as in the Hitler video)?
3) Is humor ever appropriate when it comes to genocide?
3) When can we violate other countries' sovereignty? Does this put us in danger of having our sovereignty violated?
4) Should the definition of genocide be based on numbers?

Genocide and Evil?

Hey classmates,

As a result of our end-of-semester book project, I have started to look at the theoretical relation between genocide and evil, as well as the debate over whether evil actually exists or not. In researching this topic, I've found that there seems to be similar opinions about the existence and connection of evil in modern times.

A common thread that seems to link various writings about evil (from those who believe in it's existence) is that "evil", while it can't be defined, can be felt, and that something can be classified as being evil. In other words, no one can say what evil is, but everyone knows it when they see it. And one of the events that is thought to be most obviously evil is genocide.

However, a conflicting aspect in the debate on evil is the various persepectives that determine, to individual groups, whether an event is in fact evil or not. To different cultures, what may be seen as an abominable act by an outsider from a different culture, might be the norm in another. Furthermore, what may be considered an evil act by one civilization may be considered an act of survival by another nation. Or the element of memory might come into play as well: a nation's or people's aggression towards another nation or people might be considered a retaliatory act, a "getting-even-of", for an act that was committed against them long ago.

For further ideas on evil and it's defintion, as well as it's relation to society, you can go to the website http://www.ourcivilisation.com/moral/moral8.htm, or if you feel like reading, I recommend "Evil: An Investigation" by Lance Morrow. (It's a little heavy, but well written and thought provoking.)

Some questions I have for everyone are:
1)Do you believe that evil exists? If so, in what sense? (A religious sense, a moral sense, etc.)
2)What makes a person evil? Are they born that way, or is it a case of nature vs. nurture?
3)Can any one event be unanimously labeled evil by the global community, or do cultural differences create boundaries that forever divide opinions?

Questions for Speakers

Ms. Finn also announced last class the upcoming speakers that will be appearing in the next couple of classes. For the H blockers, we can get prepared for:
1. A speaker who is a descendant of a victim and a survivor of the Armenian Genocide and
2. Mr. Kamm (Rene Kamm’s dad) about foreign policy roughly (?) in relation to what we are learning and responsibility during genocides. [Rene, please correct me or add on if I am wrong]

Since there is much to look forward to in listening to our speakers, I thought it would be good to do a little prep before the speakers come.

Let this post be an open area for questions that we want to ask or things that we want to know more about. Then, when it comes the class when the speakers come, we will already have thought a little about what we’re trying to learn from the speaker, in addition to being a good listener.

Feel free to also add the biographies of either speakers.

Power of Photography

Hey class,
In studying the Armenian Genocide further in class, we came across an interesting idea in our last class (H block). Because the Turkish government had done such a good job at keeping all borders and ears closed about what they were doing during the years of, prior and after the genocide, it made it extremely difficult for any outside source or nation to get any knowledge about the situation. Therefore, journalists couldn’t report about the horrific stories, and governments couldn’t act towards aid. Nevertheless, this doesn’t justify anyone for not acting or doing anything.



Then there was a photographer named Armin T. Wegner, who very discretely took several photographs of the Armenian genocide, in particular, the chilling images of dead children who had starved to death. Today, this is some of the only photographic evidence that we still have of the genocide. In term, this eventually helped Armenia eventually become its own state.

It is partly because of these mere pixels on a page that give the rest of the world the blatant proof that was needed. It speaks a lot about the power that images and the media in general can have over history and in present society as well.

What if there were no photographs at all from the Armenian genocide? Would the term “Armenian genocide” still be recognized as a valid crime by some, or would there by less certainty and support?

In class, we also talked about the power of films about events such as the Holocaust and 911, and the type of power, negative or positive, that they can have on an individual, on a nation, and to the rest of the world. What other examples or thoughts do you have about the influence of the media on our perception of history, and how it affects the worldviews of yourself and an entire society?

The above two photographs are both copyrighted by Armin T. Wegner. Some of Wegner’s photographs can also be found on the Armeniapedia by Wikipedia: http://www.armeniapedia.org/index.php?title=Armenian_Genocide_Photos&printable=yes

Please take a look and give some responses.

President Bush is Asked to Speak at an Iranian College

As a response to Iranian President Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia University, Iran's Ferdowsi University has asked President Bush to speak. Unfortunately, the invitation was declined due to various reasons, mostly having to do with freedom of expression and condemnations of Iran's foreign policy. While having seen America's reaction and rebuttals to President Ahmadinejad last week, it would have been interesting to see Ferdowsi College's reaction to Bush's statements.

Here is a link to the article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7024692.stm

Do you think President Bush should have accepted this invitation? Why?
What do you think Ferdowsi University's reactions would have been?
What was Ferdowsi University's motivation for inviting President Bush to speak?

Allan Ryan

In class today we watched a brief clip of a speech by Allan Ryan and his definition of genocide. He stated that there has to be killing on a large scale for it to be a genocide, with a specific number of people killed. This is a source of contention for many because, as Lemkin said, once a number of people have been killed, the genocide has already happened, and there cannot be preventitive measures taken. I was wondering if Ryan had a counterargumetn to that argument so I looked him up online and found this article.
click here

Ken Gewertz of the Harvard University Gazette states about Ryan's approach that, "Assigning strict parameters to the crime of genocide, to talk of numbers killed and other specific issues, may seem cold-blooded, but such definition is necessary to avoid the sort of prevarication that kept the United States and other nations from acting in the case of Rwanda." This article, and Ryan, make a strong case for assigning "strict parameters" to the concept of genocide. Based on the video from class and the article, do you agree or disagree with Ryan? Why? Do you think his ideas necessarily have to contradict Lemkin's? Why or why not?

Here are the links to the video, "Redefining Genocide" and another one, "Clarifying the Definition of Genocide" (also by Ryan)

Redefining Genocide

Clarifying the Definition of Genocide

Political Constituencies

In response to the video on the absence of certain forerunners in the republican presidential race I would like to ask a few questions. American politics is based almost completely in the concept of "identity," but not identity of thought. What does it mean to be "for" a group of people? I don't believe that someone can be a candidite that is "for" women, or "for" Christians. The very phrase is meaningless. How many different kinds of women are there? How many different kinds of Christians? Now you could be "for" socialism or universal health-care, but you can't be "for" someone simply because they have a slightly different anatomy than someone else. American politics would be far better, and Americans far smarter, if we stopped voting based on our (or the candidate's) appearance and started voting based on real vibrant political beliefs.

GOP leaders M.I.A.

Per Ms. Finn's request, here is a local news station's clip covering the "second tier" of Republican presidential candidates at the Morgan State debate. The clip, as well as the debate itself, focuses on the absence of GOP front-running candidates (all explained that they had scheduling and/or travel complications).

Why do you think these "big fish" did not feel pressed to schedule the Morgan State debate into their tours? Do you think that this reflects their commitment to the Latino and/or African American community? What would you have done if you were one of the front-runners in the Republican presidential election?

Irish Potato Famine a genocide?

I was just wondering what everyone's reactions are to the Irish potato famine. I felt like I should know more about it since my family emigrated to America during the famine, and I'd like to share it with the class. I personally wouldn't necessarily call the famine a genocide, but it definitely plays into what we've been talking about in class regarding upstanders, bystanders, and perpetrators. Obviously in this case you could say that England was a bystander, therefore contributing to the massive death toll in Ireland.

Here is a site claiming that the potato famine was an act of genocide. It has some pretty interesting claims that you should check out

http://www.nde.state.ne.us/ss/irish/irish_pf.html

And here's an overview of the famine

http://www.answers.com/topic/irish-potato-famine-1


How could the Irish potato famine be classified as a genocide?
How is the famine similar, in ways, to what is going on in Darfur?

In response to the conversation about humor and genocide (from Ms. Finn)

Hello class:

Thank you for such a lively and interesting blog. I want to encourge you to keep up the conversation and continue to look for meaningful thought provoking connections.

You will notice that I have removed the video that was posted over the weekend. I have saved the comments written in response to this video and these will be reposted. I have also kept the questions that went along with the video (which are definately worth considering). We will talk more in class about my decision to remove the video.

In the meantime, please consider the questions that we have been pondering about free speech vs. responsibility and the role that public forums (such as this blog) play in helping to memorialize and instruct others about genocide.

Best,
Ms. FInn

Reflection on Petitioning for SF Chronicle Coverage of the Genocide in Darfur

I know that a lot of people went to petition for more coverage of the genocide in Darfur by the San Francisco Chronicle today, and I had some interesting experiences that made me think about this class, so I thought I'd write a little about them and maybe some other people could, too? Jillian and I were going up to people sitting on benches; many of them were very nice and supportive. We met one man who told us "You do know that this isn't going to do anything, that this means nothing at all, and that they won't look at this, right? What you should really do is start a blog." We then got to tell them that our class had a blog about genocide and human behavior. It also made me wonder if this guy was right. If a newspaper isn't covering something, there's probably a reason. This made me question what that reason was. Maybe that's a very naive question and the answer is staring me in the face, but I can't seem to understand their motivation for not covering it, or at least not very much in proportion to the number of important occurrences taking place there. If anybody had asked about that I would not have been informed enough, but nobody did.
I think the scariest thing we encountered was a genial elderly woman reading a romance novel. We went up to her and started to give her the mini-talk about how despite the fact that there was a mass murder occurring, it was getting minimal coverage in the Chronicle. She asked a question, and we proceeded to give her more details about the genocide. Then she started laughing kindly, and said. "Oh. Well, I don't really care!" We knew that there are people who don't care about this in the world, but to be faced with it so bluntly was very shocking, and we didn't really know what to say. Part of me wanted to say "Well, you should, hundreds of thousands of people are being killed," but I knew that acting discourteously would not help anyone. I think what shocked me more than anything was the way that she was so friendly in this statement, as though it was just that she did not care about whether it would rain today. When I think about people who don't care about the genocide occurring, I don't tend to picture them as friendly or nice, and this woman showed me how universal this apathy could really be. It was a very frightening thought.

Response to Thom's Posting

This is in response to my comment on "Genocide and Humor." I referenced a scene in "The Producers," a Mel Brooks movie that uses comedy on a touchy subject. Was it successful or distasteful?