9th Grade Humanities
Becoming a Brave New World
Miles Rivera
April 1930. Henry Ford has been found dead in his mansion. Mass panic and confusion is happening in Detroit and the nation because one of the most powerful men in the world has passed. Who will take his place and continue to push Ford’s views to keep the nation balanced? His name is Peter Washington. Peter was one of Ford’s loyal followers, he believes that the world can be perfect for everyone and he has a plan to do it. But some believe that he is insane and giving him power can be a huge threat. These people are the Truth’s Army, mainly a religious group that is against Ford’s views; community, identity, stability. They fight to keep truth and beauty in the world. They believe that to experience true beauty, you must suffer first. Some consider them a cult but they see themselves as the only thing preventing a global disaster.
June 1932. The Ford Political party runs the city council in Detroit and other nearby counties. This power allows Peter and the Ford Company to gain much more money by manipulating laws, and they start implementing their ideas in everyday society and their factories. The motto - community, identity, stability - is becoming a common phrase to say around the factories. The workers are an example for the rest of the nation of how peaceful and happy people can be. A new drug called soma is currently being developed and is planned to be released to the public within the next couple years or so. It is said to be extremely addictive and causes people to become calm, happy, and have mild hallucinations. The Truth’s Army finds out about soma through inside sources and realizes that this new drug could enslave the world.
August 1933. The Truth’s Army launches a full scale attack on Ford’s research labs. The labs were destroyed and most of the workers were killed. In the Truth’s Army’s eyes they have gained their first step to stop the tyranny that is taking over the nation. True beauty will never die as long as they are there to defend it. The casualties they suffered in the assault were necessary for them and everyone else in the world to experience the hard pleasures in life.
September 1933. The massacre at the Ford research labs was a national tragedy due to the huge amount of deaths. The Truth’s Army is now considered terrorists and Peter makes a speech to the public and vows to the people that the terrorists will be stopped. The assault on the labs was a huge backfire for the Truth’s Army because now people are scared and have hate for them, which has pushed the people closer to Peter and Ford. The attack barley had an impact on the development of soma, it is still planned to be released soon.
May 1939. Little battles have raged on but Peter gains more power and Soma has been released to all of Fords workers. Soma has become extremely popular and is now being sold illegally on the streets and nothing is being done to stop it. Peter doesn’t want it stopped he wants the whole world addicted to this drug. As soon as they decide to control the drug, all the power goes to the controllers.
December 1941. The Ford Political party won the presidential election and now controls most of the government. Soma has been legalized and the government is slowly pushing to become more utopian and equal. Everyone is now using birth control, and decanting is currently being experimented with. Peter has become the first of the world controllers. The rest of the world is right behind the US and following their example. Civilization is more peaceful then it has ever been.
January 1942. The Truth’s Army has been looked down upon and has lost most of its members either to soma and the simple pleasures that everyone is promised now, or they have been killed in the battles that seem to have no effect on anyone but themselves. But they need to fight back. If they don’t, nobody will ever experience true beauty and happiness. But what good is fighting back if it has no effect on anybody but themselves. Peter has just ordered an attack on these rebels. Within hours the Truth’s Army remaining members will be bombed. There is now no proof that they ever existed, except for people’s memories. But those people soon forget, and now nothing stands in Ford’s way.
Miles Rivera
April 1930. Henry Ford has been found dead in his mansion. Mass panic and confusion is happening in Detroit and the nation because one of the most powerful men in the world has passed. Who will take his place and continue to push Ford’s views to keep the nation balanced? His name is Peter Washington. Peter was one of Ford’s loyal followers, he believes that the world can be perfect for everyone and he has a plan to do it. But some believe that he is insane and giving him power can be a huge threat. These people are the Truth’s Army, mainly a religious group that is against Ford’s views; community, identity, stability. They fight to keep truth and beauty in the world. They believe that to experience true beauty, you must suffer first. Some consider them a cult but they see themselves as the only thing preventing a global disaster.
June 1932. The Ford Political party runs the city council in Detroit and other nearby counties. This power allows Peter and the Ford Company to gain much more money by manipulating laws, and they start implementing their ideas in everyday society and their factories. The motto - community, identity, stability - is becoming a common phrase to say around the factories. The workers are an example for the rest of the nation of how peaceful and happy people can be. A new drug called soma is currently being developed and is planned to be released to the public within the next couple years or so. It is said to be extremely addictive and causes people to become calm, happy, and have mild hallucinations. The Truth’s Army finds out about soma through inside sources and realizes that this new drug could enslave the world.
August 1933. The Truth’s Army launches a full scale attack on Ford’s research labs. The labs were destroyed and most of the workers were killed. In the Truth’s Army’s eyes they have gained their first step to stop the tyranny that is taking over the nation. True beauty will never die as long as they are there to defend it. The casualties they suffered in the assault were necessary for them and everyone else in the world to experience the hard pleasures in life.
September 1933. The massacre at the Ford research labs was a national tragedy due to the huge amount of deaths. The Truth’s Army is now considered terrorists and Peter makes a speech to the public and vows to the people that the terrorists will be stopped. The assault on the labs was a huge backfire for the Truth’s Army because now people are scared and have hate for them, which has pushed the people closer to Peter and Ford. The attack barley had an impact on the development of soma, it is still planned to be released soon.
May 1939. Little battles have raged on but Peter gains more power and Soma has been released to all of Fords workers. Soma has become extremely popular and is now being sold illegally on the streets and nothing is being done to stop it. Peter doesn’t want it stopped he wants the whole world addicted to this drug. As soon as they decide to control the drug, all the power goes to the controllers.
December 1941. The Ford Political party won the presidential election and now controls most of the government. Soma has been legalized and the government is slowly pushing to become more utopian and equal. Everyone is now using birth control, and decanting is currently being experimented with. Peter has become the first of the world controllers. The rest of the world is right behind the US and following their example. Civilization is more peaceful then it has ever been.
January 1942. The Truth’s Army has been looked down upon and has lost most of its members either to soma and the simple pleasures that everyone is promised now, or they have been killed in the battles that seem to have no effect on anyone but themselves. But they need to fight back. If they don’t, nobody will ever experience true beauty and happiness. But what good is fighting back if it has no effect on anybody but themselves. Peter has just ordered an attack on these rebels. Within hours the Truth’s Army remaining members will be bombed. There is now no proof that they ever existed, except for people’s memories. But those people soon forget, and now nothing stands in Ford’s way.
Brave New World Seminar Reflection 3/30/12
1. What was the most interesting idea discussed in your seminar yesterday? Explain it and develop in detail.
We spent almost the whole seminar defining what happiness is. Almost the entire group defined happiness as you suffering and then afterwards looking at the little things in a better way. And most of the group said they would chose to suffer over being given simple pleasures and comfort. I was one of the few that tried to look at it in a different way, I am not disagreeing with them but I think the seminar could have been more interesting if we went deeper instead of repeating the same thing over and over with different examples, but it was a good and interesting discussion on what is happiness.
2. Quote one quotation from the novel you wished you would have included in the discussion, and explain why you wish you could include it.
I wish I quoted when the director was explaining decanting vs. giving birth and how all of the students thought it were gross. I think that would have been a good quote because Mr. Fisher asked us how our world is similar to theirs and the puritan heritage in America is similar to what they believe in BNW. So that could’ve brought up a quick good discussion during seminar.
3. What were you most proud of about your seminar performance yesterday?
I was proud that I was the only one that thought differently from everybody else and that I talked quite a bit. I think without me the seminar would have been a lot plainer because everyone would have thought the same thing and no one was going very deep in my opinion. I like to argue so I also kind of tried not to argue with people in the seminar and I brought up some good questions and connections that created some good thoughts. So I think I did really well overall in this seminar.
We spent almost the whole seminar defining what happiness is. Almost the entire group defined happiness as you suffering and then afterwards looking at the little things in a better way. And most of the group said they would chose to suffer over being given simple pleasures and comfort. I was one of the few that tried to look at it in a different way, I am not disagreeing with them but I think the seminar could have been more interesting if we went deeper instead of repeating the same thing over and over with different examples, but it was a good and interesting discussion on what is happiness.
2. Quote one quotation from the novel you wished you would have included in the discussion, and explain why you wish you could include it.
I wish I quoted when the director was explaining decanting vs. giving birth and how all of the students thought it were gross. I think that would have been a good quote because Mr. Fisher asked us how our world is similar to theirs and the puritan heritage in America is similar to what they believe in BNW. So that could’ve brought up a quick good discussion during seminar.
3. What were you most proud of about your seminar performance yesterday?
I was proud that I was the only one that thought differently from everybody else and that I talked quite a bit. I think without me the seminar would have been a lot plainer because everyone would have thought the same thing and no one was going very deep in my opinion. I like to argue so I also kind of tried not to argue with people in the seminar and I brought up some good questions and connections that created some good thoughts. So I think I did really well overall in this seminar.
Overview:Humanities is a mixture between language arts and social studies. It is really cool to learn them at the same time because i get to learn the content better.
|
Mask Project |
Model United Nations
Model United Nations (MUN) is where we each get assigned a country and take the role of an ambassador for that country in the United Nations. We take our countries views and perspectives and then we have a conference similar to the real United Nations to solve current international issues. Everyone writes resolutions to solve these problems based on their counties perspectives. We learn independent research, public speaking, writing skills, and diplomacy and professionalism.
2nd MUN Resolution
Security Council
Mexico (Miles Rivera)
SOLUTION FOR IRAN’S NUCLEAR PROGRAM
The Security Council,
Aware of Iran asking Mexico for support in order to prevent the UN Security Council from imposing further sanctions on Iran’s nuclear enrichment program (Ariel Farrar-Wellman),
Bearing in mind Iran has been pushing for an expansion of trade and diplomatic ties between Iran and Mexico (Todd Bensman),
Believing Iran is exploring ways to expand anemic trade with Mexico as part of stepped up efforts to deepen ties with Latin America (Alexandra Olson),
Recalling that Iran has signed and agreed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (United Nations),
Recognizing that Iran has a right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes (Enver Masmud),
Acknowledging that Iran is willing to compromise to solutions for their nuclear program, (Howard LaFranchi),
1. Confirms that all sanctions put on Iran for its nuclear program will be immediately lifted;
2. Welcomes all states to offer economic incentives to Iran to encourage Iranian government to comply with IAEA inspections;
3. Informs IAEA may choose when and where to inspect Iran’s nuclear program;
4. Has resolved that if Iran does not meet IAEA inspections, more sanctions will be imposed on Iran;
5. Proclaims that sanctions imposed on Iran for its nuclear program can be lifted again but not until IAEA inspections are met;
6. Affirms Iran does have a right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes;
7. Expresses its hope for Iran and all states worried about Iran’s nuclear program, that this resolution will satisfy all.
Mexico (Miles Rivera)
SOLUTION FOR IRAN’S NUCLEAR PROGRAM
The Security Council,
Aware of Iran asking Mexico for support in order to prevent the UN Security Council from imposing further sanctions on Iran’s nuclear enrichment program (Ariel Farrar-Wellman),
Bearing in mind Iran has been pushing for an expansion of trade and diplomatic ties between Iran and Mexico (Todd Bensman),
Believing Iran is exploring ways to expand anemic trade with Mexico as part of stepped up efforts to deepen ties with Latin America (Alexandra Olson),
Recalling that Iran has signed and agreed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (United Nations),
Recognizing that Iran has a right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes (Enver Masmud),
Acknowledging that Iran is willing to compromise to solutions for their nuclear program, (Howard LaFranchi),
1. Confirms that all sanctions put on Iran for its nuclear program will be immediately lifted;
2. Welcomes all states to offer economic incentives to Iran to encourage Iranian government to comply with IAEA inspections;
3. Informs IAEA may choose when and where to inspect Iran’s nuclear program;
4. Has resolved that if Iran does not meet IAEA inspections, more sanctions will be imposed on Iran;
5. Proclaims that sanctions imposed on Iran for its nuclear program can be lifted again but not until IAEA inspections are met;
6. Affirms Iran does have a right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes;
7. Expresses its hope for Iran and all states worried about Iran’s nuclear program, that this resolution will satisfy all.
2nd MUN Speech
UN Speech
Miles Rivera (Mexico)
I would like to draw your attention to resolution 1D. This resolution allows Iran to continue their research and have all of their nuclear facilities inspected by the IAEA (The International Atomic Energy Agency). If the IAEA finds clear evidence that Iran is constructing nuclear weapons, then Iran has agreed to have their nuclear facilities moved to Russia where it will be overseen by United Nations officials.
Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and agreed to have their nuclear program monitored by the IAEA, why not let them continue nuclear research? Why should we impose more ineffective sanctions or pay Iran hundreds of millions to try to control their nuclear program if Iran is ready to let us do this anyways? The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty states that Iran has a right to nuclear power and research that we cannot deny.
Other resolutions are extremely hostile to Iran and could cause conflict or economical problems even though Iran is offering us what we need. We can all live with this resolution because it is not going to hurt anybody if we all do our part and keep a close eye on this issue. Resolution 1D is the most realistic, and the only solution to this crisis that will not cause more problems.
Miles Rivera (Mexico)
I would like to draw your attention to resolution 1D. This resolution allows Iran to continue their research and have all of their nuclear facilities inspected by the IAEA (The International Atomic Energy Agency). If the IAEA finds clear evidence that Iran is constructing nuclear weapons, then Iran has agreed to have their nuclear facilities moved to Russia where it will be overseen by United Nations officials.
Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and agreed to have their nuclear program monitored by the IAEA, why not let them continue nuclear research? Why should we impose more ineffective sanctions or pay Iran hundreds of millions to try to control their nuclear program if Iran is ready to let us do this anyways? The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty states that Iran has a right to nuclear power and research that we cannot deny.
Other resolutions are extremely hostile to Iran and could cause conflict or economical problems even though Iran is offering us what we need. We can all live with this resolution because it is not going to hurt anybody if we all do our part and keep a close eye on this issue. Resolution 1D is the most realistic, and the only solution to this crisis that will not cause more problems.
2nd MUN Reflection
MUN Conference 2 Self-Assessment
Miles Rivera 3/1/12
1. How has your perspective changed (on the UN, the world, or the Middle East)based on this project?
Before this project I had almost no knowledge of the UN, and very little knowledge on Iran’s nuclear program or any other issue going on in the world. I think the biggest thing this project has made me realize is that there are multiple sides to every problem and you can’t just believe what other people tell you. So my perspective now is to know what every side’s perspective is so I can have my own perspective on the issue.
2. Look at what you needed to improve on from your last reflection and discuss how you improved for this conference.
I did exactly what I said I needed to improve on from last conference. I learned what all the other countries’ perspectives were and made sure my speech talked good about the resolution I was going for and I also pointed out flaws in other countries’ resolutions and what they wanted to do about the issue. So I thought my speech was really effective.
3. If we did yet at third conference, what would you most need to improve on from this conference?
I did really well this conference, but I could improve on my talking a little bit. When I was about to make a comment a couple times, what I was going to say sounded really good in my head but when I stood up to say it, it came out in the wrong order and I had to repeat myself. I don’t think it was that big of a deal but I would sound more professional if I didn’t have to start a sentence over.
4. Give yourself a grade for the following categories and explain why that is the grade you deserve:
o Overall diplomacy, professionalism, and engagement in the conference:
I would give myself an A because I stayed active in the conference the entire time, I never spoke out of turn, I went for the most realistic and neutral resolution like my country would, and I swayed multiple people to my side so the resolution I was going for passed.
o Speeches:
I made two speeches and they were both really strong. My main speech criticized other resolutions and supported my resolution with evidence and questions. My second speech I wrote down on a piece of paper during the conference so I wouldn’t have to wing it and it would sound better. I also thought I presented my speeches really well so I would give myself and A.
o Caucusing:
I stayed on task during all the caucuses and made note of who was on my side, who I was against, and who was in the middle. So I worked on swaying people in the middle to my side and making my enemies resolutions look bad. So when my enemies were amending their resolutions to be better I didn’t sign that way they would still look bad. I think that is good tactics so I would again give myself an A.
o Comments:
I probably deserve a B for comments because I only had about five and that’s not a lot compared to other people. But the comments I did have were good even though all of them were attacking comments. I might have had one supporting comment. I could’ve done a little bit better on these but they were still good.
Miles Rivera 3/1/12
1. How has your perspective changed (on the UN, the world, or the Middle East)based on this project?
Before this project I had almost no knowledge of the UN, and very little knowledge on Iran’s nuclear program or any other issue going on in the world. I think the biggest thing this project has made me realize is that there are multiple sides to every problem and you can’t just believe what other people tell you. So my perspective now is to know what every side’s perspective is so I can have my own perspective on the issue.
2. Look at what you needed to improve on from your last reflection and discuss how you improved for this conference.
I did exactly what I said I needed to improve on from last conference. I learned what all the other countries’ perspectives were and made sure my speech talked good about the resolution I was going for and I also pointed out flaws in other countries’ resolutions and what they wanted to do about the issue. So I thought my speech was really effective.
3. If we did yet at third conference, what would you most need to improve on from this conference?
I did really well this conference, but I could improve on my talking a little bit. When I was about to make a comment a couple times, what I was going to say sounded really good in my head but when I stood up to say it, it came out in the wrong order and I had to repeat myself. I don’t think it was that big of a deal but I would sound more professional if I didn’t have to start a sentence over.
4. Give yourself a grade for the following categories and explain why that is the grade you deserve:
o Overall diplomacy, professionalism, and engagement in the conference:
I would give myself an A because I stayed active in the conference the entire time, I never spoke out of turn, I went for the most realistic and neutral resolution like my country would, and I swayed multiple people to my side so the resolution I was going for passed.
o Speeches:
I made two speeches and they were both really strong. My main speech criticized other resolutions and supported my resolution with evidence and questions. My second speech I wrote down on a piece of paper during the conference so I wouldn’t have to wing it and it would sound better. I also thought I presented my speeches really well so I would give myself and A.
o Caucusing:
I stayed on task during all the caucuses and made note of who was on my side, who I was against, and who was in the middle. So I worked on swaying people in the middle to my side and making my enemies resolutions look bad. So when my enemies were amending their resolutions to be better I didn’t sign that way they would still look bad. I think that is good tactics so I would again give myself an A.
o Comments:
I probably deserve a B for comments because I only had about five and that’s not a lot compared to other people. But the comments I did have were good even though all of them were attacking comments. I might have had one supporting comment. I could’ve done a little bit better on these but they were still good.
1st MUN Resolution
United Nations High Commission on Refugees
Mexico (by Miles Rivera)
RESOLUTION FOR PALESTINIAN REFUGEE CRISIS
The General Assembly,
Alarmed by the amount of violence caused by Israelis and Palestinians,
Deeply concerned by the poor living conditions most Palestinian refugees are living in,
Aware of the 4 million Palestinian refugees currently living in states neighboring Israel (Right of Return: Palestinian Dream, Heather Sharp BBC News),
Bearing in mind that Israel will not give Palestinians the right of return (Olmert Rejects Right of Return for Palestinians, Steven Erlanger),
Recognizing that refugees currently can’t live successful lives in refugee camps,
Deeply disturbed by the rights Palestinian refugees are being denied and how they are being treated by IDF forces (The Story of Rafat, refugees.resist.ca),
Believing it will benefit everyone to create a solution for this crisis,
1. Recommends that all states with Palestinian refugees currently without citizenship, accepts 2% of those refugees as full citizens annually;
2. Authorizes the necessary education needed to become a citizen in that state will be provided to those that need it;
3. Confirms that all states with new Palestinian homes that year, will be paid $200 per new home for the year, $200 is almost half of what Israel gets paid for Jewish homes annually;
4. Declares accordingly that compensation for new Palestinian households will be paid equally by all states that pass this resolution;
5. Reminds all states following this resolution that they can reduce the number of refugees gaining citizenship if it is hurting the economy or causing any major problems to the state, but payment for new Palestinian households will also reduce;
6. Urges all states with large numbers of Palestinian refugees living in poverty to act on this crisis by following this resolution;
7. Expresses its hope that the number of refugees will decrease, and violence caused by both sides of this issue will stop.
Mexico (by Miles Rivera)
RESOLUTION FOR PALESTINIAN REFUGEE CRISIS
The General Assembly,
Alarmed by the amount of violence caused by Israelis and Palestinians,
Deeply concerned by the poor living conditions most Palestinian refugees are living in,
Aware of the 4 million Palestinian refugees currently living in states neighboring Israel (Right of Return: Palestinian Dream, Heather Sharp BBC News),
Bearing in mind that Israel will not give Palestinians the right of return (Olmert Rejects Right of Return for Palestinians, Steven Erlanger),
Recognizing that refugees currently can’t live successful lives in refugee camps,
Deeply disturbed by the rights Palestinian refugees are being denied and how they are being treated by IDF forces (The Story of Rafat, refugees.resist.ca),
Believing it will benefit everyone to create a solution for this crisis,
1. Recommends that all states with Palestinian refugees currently without citizenship, accepts 2% of those refugees as full citizens annually;
2. Authorizes the necessary education needed to become a citizen in that state will be provided to those that need it;
3. Confirms that all states with new Palestinian homes that year, will be paid $200 per new home for the year, $200 is almost half of what Israel gets paid for Jewish homes annually;
4. Declares accordingly that compensation for new Palestinian households will be paid equally by all states that pass this resolution;
5. Reminds all states following this resolution that they can reduce the number of refugees gaining citizenship if it is hurting the economy or causing any major problems to the state, but payment for new Palestinian households will also reduce;
6. Urges all states with large numbers of Palestinian refugees living in poverty to act on this crisis by following this resolution;
7. Expresses its hope that the number of refugees will decrease, and violence caused by both sides of this issue will stop.
1st MUN Speech
My first Speech was basically about how my resolution was the best solution for the Palestinian refugee issue because it was realistic and low risk. Other resolutions were very extreme and high risk and could just cause another crisis but mine had no loop holes. So my speech was very defensive for my resolution and just explaining why my resolution was the best for those resolutions.
1st MUN Reflection
UN Conference Self-Assessment
Miles Rivera (Mexico)
1. What are you most proud of about this conference?
I was pretty nervous about the conference because I forgot my docket packet and speech at school. But I rewrote my speech and was completely prepared for the conference. I was one of the people that spoke the most and everything I said was worth saying, I didn’t just say things just to talk.
2. What did you connect with most in this project, and how did that affect your conference performance?
I am always interested in world issues so this entire thing with the Palestinian refugees really got my attention. I didn’t know anything about this before this project, but I connected a lot with the history of Israel. The Palestinians and the Israelis have been through a lot and they both deserve the holy land and to live successful lives. So I was really neutral on this issue and so was my country so I basically got to do what I believe and wanted to do, which is really cool.
3. What was the most important thing you learned in this project? Why?
Again, the most important thing was probably the history of Israel and the Jews and Arabs. Most people don’t know anything about Israel and just agree with what most people tell them. Now that I know a little bit about this I can have my own perspective on this, and decide what I think is right and wrong. This also goes for everything, it’s better to do the research yourself so you can think for yourself.
4. If you were a teacher or observer, what would you say about your performance in conference? (Good AND Bad!)
If I was watching my performance as someone else I would say I did a good job. I was one of the people that was involved the most and talked the most in the conference. Sometimes my thoughts couldn’t come out the right way and didn’t make sense and were hard to understand. But It would look like I believed in my resolution and was trying hard to get it passed.
5. For our next MUN conference, what would you most want to improve in your performance? How do you plan on doing this?
In the next Conference I would like to know about other country’s perspectives so I know who are my enemies and allies. Then I can make sure that in my speech I make sure that my resolution has the things that other resolutions are lacking. So my speech will secretly be offensive. It would be a strong start and hard to beat.
6. Did you have a resolution or amendment on the docket? Yes/No
Yes.
7. Did any of your resolutions or amendments pass? Which ones?
a. Pass = Passed final vote. Resolution must passed to get amendments passed.
No my resolution didn’t pass and I didn’t write an amendment.
8. Estimate the total number of:
a. Speeches you made (during substantive debate and formal caucus)
I made 2 Speeches, so I was on the speakers list twice.
b. Comments/questions you had
I had about 5-8 comments. And 1 or 2 questions for the chairs.
Miles Rivera (Mexico)
1. What are you most proud of about this conference?
I was pretty nervous about the conference because I forgot my docket packet and speech at school. But I rewrote my speech and was completely prepared for the conference. I was one of the people that spoke the most and everything I said was worth saying, I didn’t just say things just to talk.
2. What did you connect with most in this project, and how did that affect your conference performance?
I am always interested in world issues so this entire thing with the Palestinian refugees really got my attention. I didn’t know anything about this before this project, but I connected a lot with the history of Israel. The Palestinians and the Israelis have been through a lot and they both deserve the holy land and to live successful lives. So I was really neutral on this issue and so was my country so I basically got to do what I believe and wanted to do, which is really cool.
3. What was the most important thing you learned in this project? Why?
Again, the most important thing was probably the history of Israel and the Jews and Arabs. Most people don’t know anything about Israel and just agree with what most people tell them. Now that I know a little bit about this I can have my own perspective on this, and decide what I think is right and wrong. This also goes for everything, it’s better to do the research yourself so you can think for yourself.
4. If you were a teacher or observer, what would you say about your performance in conference? (Good AND Bad!)
If I was watching my performance as someone else I would say I did a good job. I was one of the people that was involved the most and talked the most in the conference. Sometimes my thoughts couldn’t come out the right way and didn’t make sense and were hard to understand. But It would look like I believed in my resolution and was trying hard to get it passed.
5. For our next MUN conference, what would you most want to improve in your performance? How do you plan on doing this?
In the next Conference I would like to know about other country’s perspectives so I know who are my enemies and allies. Then I can make sure that in my speech I make sure that my resolution has the things that other resolutions are lacking. So my speech will secretly be offensive. It would be a strong start and hard to beat.
6. Did you have a resolution or amendment on the docket? Yes/No
Yes.
7. Did any of your resolutions or amendments pass? Which ones?
a. Pass = Passed final vote. Resolution must passed to get amendments passed.
No my resolution didn’t pass and I didn’t write an amendment.
8. Estimate the total number of:
a. Speeches you made (during substantive debate and formal caucus)
I made 2 Speeches, so I was on the speakers list twice.
b. Comments/questions you had
I had about 5-8 comments. And 1 or 2 questions for the chairs.