Poetry Project
Final Poem
Peace is not an action
But more of a concept
It can’t be solved with a fraction
But what solution do we accept
Capitalism rules the world
Even the bottom blindly follows
People live for those pearls
It’s like sweet cyanide we swallow
We live as kings
Compared to the serfs
Your diamond rings
Cost lives for its worth
It is hard to comprehend
A world without violence
It might not exist until the end
When the world is silenced
But if we move forward
It can only get better
This shouldn’t be ordered
Be peaceful, send a letter
Time is our friend
But it can also be our downfall
If this tear doesn’t mend
Then society may fall
I want to keep living our beautiful lie
But I don’t want to have the guilt
Of what we leave behind when we die.
But more of a concept
It can’t be solved with a fraction
But what solution do we accept
Capitalism rules the world
Even the bottom blindly follows
People live for those pearls
It’s like sweet cyanide we swallow
We live as kings
Compared to the serfs
Your diamond rings
Cost lives for its worth
It is hard to comprehend
A world without violence
It might not exist until the end
When the world is silenced
But if we move forward
It can only get better
This shouldn’t be ordered
Be peaceful, send a letter
Time is our friend
But it can also be our downfall
If this tear doesn’t mend
Then society may fall
I want to keep living our beautiful lie
But I don’t want to have the guilt
Of what we leave behind when we die.
Final Project
Growth as a Poet Reflection
My perspective has grown throughout my drafts by me really just finding what my perspective is and refining it. In my first draft I had no idea what my perspective was I just knew that I wanted to do it on peace so I wrote down all of my ideas on peace. It was a stream of thought and I got all of my ideas of peace onto paper and it was about 3 pages long and had no structure at all and wasn’t a poem but just pieces of poems that I came up with. The final draft of my poem that I had was much shorter and I still felt like I had all of my most important ideas that I came up with during that stream of thought in the first draft. Some of the ideas were that capitalism and power are bad, but I still like living in a first world country, we need a solution because we are destroying the earth but I don’t know what to do, we should be more optimistic about peace, peace is a real goal and is reachable. Then in my final draft I put all of those ideas into a structured poem that is poetic and fits together so I can’t really post lines here because it all has to fit together to make sense when I look at it with those ideas. The process of writing my poem and getting feedback and refining my poem has helped my perspective on peace grow throughout this project.
One of the most important changes I made to my poem was the rhyme scheme. My first draft didn’t have a rhyme scheme at all so it had no flow and just sounded jumbled and nothing fit together right. I didn’t really like free verse poems and that is what mine currently was if anything and I was really liking the rhyming poems of my peers that I was reading so I started playing around with a couple drafts of trying to making it rhyme. I didn’t finish them, but then I started on the one that I finished with the structure and rhyme scheme that I created. My final draft ended up being an ABABCDCD rhyme scheme single stanza poem that I created and it fit really nicely with my ideas because all of my lines tied into the next lines really well. This change was almost necessary for my poem and it turned out very well in the end.
Another major change I made to my poem was the length. As I mentioned previously, I started out with 3 pages of thoughts, lines, and pieces of poems. So it really had no structure at all and wasn’t a poem yet. I think a long poem when it is pulled off nicely and refined is really good and awesome but I wrote those 3 pages in about 30min and I had the intent the whole time to shorten it and refine it and not to refine every single piece of it and keep it long but I mean refine it as in only keep the best parts. I got feedback and pulled out the best pieces of those 3 pages and then throughout my drafts that got shortened down and compacted into a little more than half a page. I think the length of my poem is perfect because I still have all of my ideas and my perspective in there clearly but not too clearly and the length is not insanely short but it gets the point across and just pulls everything together.
The last and possibly most important change I made to my poem is my use of poetic devices. I didn’t use a lot of one device due to the length of my poem and that it really was unfinished but I did use many devices and they all are used well, such as similes, metaphors, rhythm, imagery, rhyme scheme and others. My first draft didn’t really have poetic devices it was just words or it did have them in there but they were scattered and I did not use them intentionally. In my final draft I improved my poem with all of those devices intentionally and refined them. This shows my writing ability through the process of my drafts. My poems improved greatly by adding in these devices because it is really what makes it a poem and not just a jumbled mess that nobody wants to spend the time to read, and people now enjoy it and respect it.
One of the most important changes I made to my poem was the rhyme scheme. My first draft didn’t have a rhyme scheme at all so it had no flow and just sounded jumbled and nothing fit together right. I didn’t really like free verse poems and that is what mine currently was if anything and I was really liking the rhyming poems of my peers that I was reading so I started playing around with a couple drafts of trying to making it rhyme. I didn’t finish them, but then I started on the one that I finished with the structure and rhyme scheme that I created. My final draft ended up being an ABABCDCD rhyme scheme single stanza poem that I created and it fit really nicely with my ideas because all of my lines tied into the next lines really well. This change was almost necessary for my poem and it turned out very well in the end.
Another major change I made to my poem was the length. As I mentioned previously, I started out with 3 pages of thoughts, lines, and pieces of poems. So it really had no structure at all and wasn’t a poem yet. I think a long poem when it is pulled off nicely and refined is really good and awesome but I wrote those 3 pages in about 30min and I had the intent the whole time to shorten it and refine it and not to refine every single piece of it and keep it long but I mean refine it as in only keep the best parts. I got feedback and pulled out the best pieces of those 3 pages and then throughout my drafts that got shortened down and compacted into a little more than half a page. I think the length of my poem is perfect because I still have all of my ideas and my perspective in there clearly but not too clearly and the length is not insanely short but it gets the point across and just pulls everything together.
The last and possibly most important change I made to my poem is my use of poetic devices. I didn’t use a lot of one device due to the length of my poem and that it really was unfinished but I did use many devices and they all are used well, such as similes, metaphors, rhythm, imagery, rhyme scheme and others. My first draft didn’t really have poetic devices it was just words or it did have them in there but they were scattered and I did not use them intentionally. In my final draft I improved my poem with all of those devices intentionally and refined them. This shows my writing ability through the process of my drafts. My poems improved greatly by adding in these devices because it is really what makes it a poem and not just a jumbled mess that nobody wants to spend the time to read, and people now enjoy it and respect it.
Global Village Seminar Reflection
In the middle of the seminar we had just started talking about if this globalization and less diversity is good or bad. Eric said that genocide is caused by diversity. I thought that this was a great point and it sparked a couple ideas in my head. I replied to that comment after he said that to add further with my ideas. I said something similar like if we continue on this path and our identity’s become more diluted, and our cultures merge, and we are more alike and less diverse it is hard and there is less reason to separate and classify people, so globalization is a good thing because there will be less genocide and wars. Eric’s first comment helped me make those connections and further develop my opinion on globalization so I could share it with others.
The seminar question: Is this "new world order" he is describing ultimately positive or negative? In what ways? My opinion on this question is that this new world order has more positive sides to it than negative sides. From what I heard in seminar and thought about there are few downsides. The main one is that everybody wants to feel special and unique, and they are afraid of being the same as everybody else and to be born with nothing that they can be proud of such as their nationality or family traditions. I feel like most of the people that I am surrounded by are already very similar and I can’t tell where their ancestors are from or what is significantly different between most of us. We celebrate the same holidays and have similar daily routines and similar families. There are a lot of exceptions to this but really most of us are all American and have lived here all of our lives.
I believe the author, Pico Iyer, thinks this new less diversified world is positive. When he mentions that we are moving towards a “Cosmic Race” on the third page third paragraph he describes it as “a glorious blend”. During this whole article Pico’s word choice is very positive and it gives off a positive vibe. I think that what we are heading to, whether others like it or not is for the most part positive. If we are all less diverse and more similar there is less reason for conflict so there would hopefully be much less, and everybody can work together to solve mutual problems and help each other out and humanity could be just much more stable in general.
This article really connects to Galtung and our peace and violence lectures. The article was mostly just an observation and idea that the author had. Like what I was talking about in previous paragraphs, these observations could be a sign that the new world order we are moving to is a more peaceful one. Galtung describes violence as limiting somebodies potential. It is hard to limit others by their ethnicity or nationality if everybody is very similar. Of course people will still be put into wealth classes and can be limited by if they are born into a poor family, but the likeliness of being born into a poor family because your family immigrated from another nation, or has a different ethnic ancestors should go down greatly. I think Galtung would appreciate this article but he might also think deeper about it than I have and discover that it is very flawed but right now I think that we are moving away from Galtung’s definition of violence and more towards peace.
In the second to last paragraph on the last page Pico says “The world will not become America. Anyone who has been to a baseball game in Osaka, or a Pizza Hut in Moscow instantly knows they are not in Kansas anymore.” I chose to illustrate this quote for my cartoon. What it means is that globalization will not become really extreme and the whole world will not be as culturally merged as America. Even though it’s the same chain, and the same food, a Pizza Hut in Russia will be different than one here in America, because there will be more Russians there than Americans and there could be different toppings or appetizers because of the resources available on the opposite side of the world. Globalization will make us more similar and spread these companies and people internationally but we will never be the exact same.
The seminar question: Is this "new world order" he is describing ultimately positive or negative? In what ways? My opinion on this question is that this new world order has more positive sides to it than negative sides. From what I heard in seminar and thought about there are few downsides. The main one is that everybody wants to feel special and unique, and they are afraid of being the same as everybody else and to be born with nothing that they can be proud of such as their nationality or family traditions. I feel like most of the people that I am surrounded by are already very similar and I can’t tell where their ancestors are from or what is significantly different between most of us. We celebrate the same holidays and have similar daily routines and similar families. There are a lot of exceptions to this but really most of us are all American and have lived here all of our lives.
I believe the author, Pico Iyer, thinks this new less diversified world is positive. When he mentions that we are moving towards a “Cosmic Race” on the third page third paragraph he describes it as “a glorious blend”. During this whole article Pico’s word choice is very positive and it gives off a positive vibe. I think that what we are heading to, whether others like it or not is for the most part positive. If we are all less diverse and more similar there is less reason for conflict so there would hopefully be much less, and everybody can work together to solve mutual problems and help each other out and humanity could be just much more stable in general.
This article really connects to Galtung and our peace and violence lectures. The article was mostly just an observation and idea that the author had. Like what I was talking about in previous paragraphs, these observations could be a sign that the new world order we are moving to is a more peaceful one. Galtung describes violence as limiting somebodies potential. It is hard to limit others by their ethnicity or nationality if everybody is very similar. Of course people will still be put into wealth classes and can be limited by if they are born into a poor family, but the likeliness of being born into a poor family because your family immigrated from another nation, or has a different ethnic ancestors should go down greatly. I think Galtung would appreciate this article but he might also think deeper about it than I have and discover that it is very flawed but right now I think that we are moving away from Galtung’s definition of violence and more towards peace.
In the second to last paragraph on the last page Pico says “The world will not become America. Anyone who has been to a baseball game in Osaka, or a Pizza Hut in Moscow instantly knows they are not in Kansas anymore.” I chose to illustrate this quote for my cartoon. What it means is that globalization will not become really extreme and the whole world will not be as culturally merged as America. Even though it’s the same chain, and the same food, a Pizza Hut in Russia will be different than one here in America, because there will be more Russians there than Americans and there could be different toppings or appetizers because of the resources available on the opposite side of the world. Globalization will make us more similar and spread these companies and people internationally but we will never be the exact same.
The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas Seminar Reflection
Part 1, Option 3: The ones who walk away from Omelas usually march straight from the basement to the front gates of Omelas. They leave without saying any goodbyes or deciding if their possessions should be left to family members. I think they leave out of anger, guilt, and confusion. They don’t know what kind of society they live in anymore, where they can live so happy and carefree while this child is suffering in a basement, starving, and sitting in poop. They feel guilty for not doing anything to help the child and understanding that if they did how happy of a life would the child actually live or they do not understand and just feel bad that it is there. So they leave out of protest of not wanting to be a part of it anymore and wanting to go learn more about the world they live in and who they really are. But everybody leaves for their own reasons even if they are very similar reasons.
After they leave the gates they walk off at a steady pace into the distance and never look back. They walk until nightfall and then they sleep on the ground because it is warm enough to do it in this world. They sleep like a rock but they are terrorized by nightmares of the child suffering in the basement and when they wake up in the morning they immediately set off into the sunrise to get farther away from the child, and the people, and the city of Omelas. They usually walk for several more days with little water and food, only when they cross a stream or find some wild berries and nuts. So far they have no opinion on their new life and don’t regret leaving but are not quite satisfied with their journey at the moment I think.
Eventually, after they have walked for nearly a week and their feet now have blisters and are extremely tired they reach a small village. The village has no more than 25 people in it. This village’s population is the ones who have walked away from Omelas. The village has straw and wood huts and shacks with a well in the middle. The people here now live a simple life, doing what is necessary for survival. Hunting, gathering, and living their lives how they want to live them and have to live them.
The reason they are all happy is because they know they could never return to Omelas even if they wanted to, and the result of that is less freedom. They must enjoy all the little things in their life at the moment and the satisfaction they get from doing all the work that needs to be done to survive now, the simple life. So they all are experiencing synthetic happiness, and they believe that they are the happiest people alive because of it. They never have to deal with having everything handed to them and carry the guilt of the little kid ever again. They are all at peace.
Part 2, Question 7: The city of Omelas locks a child in broom closet to suffer, sit naked in its own feces, and starve, and I believe our culture has at least one scapegoat similar to this. Recently, a fellow peer took a trip to Argentina, and when he got back and as he was telling me about it, he mentioned that everyone down there thinks of America as this perfect place, with money, and luxuries, and everybody is happy. This is one of the first things I thought of at the beginning of seminar coaching and I started comparing Omelas to the U.S. from an outside view. But what I think a lot of people here and most likely in some foreign countries like Argentina, is that we don’t just create our wealth and power, we take a lot of it from others. On the second fourth page in the fourth paragraph LeGuin says “One of them may come in and kick the child to make it stand up.” and “It is feeble minded. Perhaps it was born defective,”. The first thing I thought of when I read this paragraph during coaching was how many Americans still have racial stereotypes, and how we take our wealth from others. For example, this kid could be Iraq, and there are many people that think we are more superior to them and that Iraqis are crazy and all extremists, then one day we come in and kick Iraq to get its government in shape and take their oil. On the fifth page second paragraph LeGuin states “They all know it is there, the people of Omelas.” Just as the people all know that the child is there, we know what is happening in parts of the Middle east, but most of us do not have the power to do anything and many of us are content to knowing what is happening there just like the people of Omelas. I can compare the city of Omelas to many things in our culture such as the western world with imperialism. But this example is the one that I first thought of and fits well. The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas is a fictional and very dark story but it can also be a very symbolic and true one.
After they leave the gates they walk off at a steady pace into the distance and never look back. They walk until nightfall and then they sleep on the ground because it is warm enough to do it in this world. They sleep like a rock but they are terrorized by nightmares of the child suffering in the basement and when they wake up in the morning they immediately set off into the sunrise to get farther away from the child, and the people, and the city of Omelas. They usually walk for several more days with little water and food, only when they cross a stream or find some wild berries and nuts. So far they have no opinion on their new life and don’t regret leaving but are not quite satisfied with their journey at the moment I think.
Eventually, after they have walked for nearly a week and their feet now have blisters and are extremely tired they reach a small village. The village has no more than 25 people in it. This village’s population is the ones who have walked away from Omelas. The village has straw and wood huts and shacks with a well in the middle. The people here now live a simple life, doing what is necessary for survival. Hunting, gathering, and living their lives how they want to live them and have to live them.
The reason they are all happy is because they know they could never return to Omelas even if they wanted to, and the result of that is less freedom. They must enjoy all the little things in their life at the moment and the satisfaction they get from doing all the work that needs to be done to survive now, the simple life. So they all are experiencing synthetic happiness, and they believe that they are the happiest people alive because of it. They never have to deal with having everything handed to them and carry the guilt of the little kid ever again. They are all at peace.
Part 2, Question 7: The city of Omelas locks a child in broom closet to suffer, sit naked in its own feces, and starve, and I believe our culture has at least one scapegoat similar to this. Recently, a fellow peer took a trip to Argentina, and when he got back and as he was telling me about it, he mentioned that everyone down there thinks of America as this perfect place, with money, and luxuries, and everybody is happy. This is one of the first things I thought of at the beginning of seminar coaching and I started comparing Omelas to the U.S. from an outside view. But what I think a lot of people here and most likely in some foreign countries like Argentina, is that we don’t just create our wealth and power, we take a lot of it from others. On the second fourth page in the fourth paragraph LeGuin says “One of them may come in and kick the child to make it stand up.” and “It is feeble minded. Perhaps it was born defective,”. The first thing I thought of when I read this paragraph during coaching was how many Americans still have racial stereotypes, and how we take our wealth from others. For example, this kid could be Iraq, and there are many people that think we are more superior to them and that Iraqis are crazy and all extremists, then one day we come in and kick Iraq to get its government in shape and take their oil. On the fifth page second paragraph LeGuin states “They all know it is there, the people of Omelas.” Just as the people all know that the child is there, we know what is happening in parts of the Middle east, but most of us do not have the power to do anything and many of us are content to knowing what is happening there just like the people of Omelas. I can compare the city of Omelas to many things in our culture such as the western world with imperialism. But this example is the one that I first thought of and fits well. The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas is a fictional and very dark story but it can also be a very symbolic and true one.
Cambodian Genocide Project/Political Cartoon Reflection
Final Opposite Editorial
The Khmer Rouge, an over the top communist party, ruled over Cambodia from 1975 – 1979 and during that time period nearly two million lives were lost through execution, starvation, and forced labor. The Khmer Rouge was a communist party formed in 1968 most known for their social engineering. They attempted to turn Cambodia into a peasant state based on agriculture and complete self-sufficiency. The Khmer Rouge’s communist extremism resulted in the death of 25% of Cambodia population.
The start of this extremist movement lies in Pol Pot, the leader of the Khmer Rouge, who had been introduced to communist ideas when he received a scholarship to further his engineering studies in Paris (Guess). He was an admirer of Mao/Chinese communism, and envisioned the creation of a new Cambodia based on the Maoist-Communist model (Walker).
Maoism sees the rural peasantry as the key revolutionary force which can transform a capitalist society towards socialism. The Khmer Rouge’s interpretation of Maoist communism allowed them to believe that they could create a classless society, just simply by eliminating all social classes except for the poor peasants who work the land.
In 1975 the Khmer Rouge took control over Phnom Penh. Within days the residents of Phnom Penh were forced to leave the city, on a long march to labor camps on the countryside to work in the fields, anyone that couldn’t make the distance was killed. All contact with the West and capitalism was severed and Western practices were outlawed along with money, books and religion. All of these were punishable by torture and death.
To achieve Pol Pot’s extreme communist model, the Khmer Rouge believed that all Cambodians must work as laborers on farms. Anyone that was against or that was thought to be against this system was executed. The first people to be killed were intellectuals, educated people, professionals, monks, religious enthusiasts, ethnic Chinese, Vietnamese, Thai, and even Cambodians with Chinese, Vietnamese or Thai heritage. The Khmer Rouge had a saying "To keep you is no benefit. To destroy you is no loss." (Locard). Unfortunately, survival in Khmer Rouge Cambodia was determined by one’s ability to work, so Cambodia’s elderly, handicapped, ill, and children perished because they could not perform intense physical labor every day.
The Khmer Rouge was also insanely suspicious of normal people including its own members. They vigorously interrogated their members, and frequently executed members on suspicion of treachery or sabotage. In Frontline World’s video on the Cambodian genocide they interviewed a woman whose husband had been killed because they had an outrageous idea that he was working for the CIA even though he had lived in that village his whole life (CAMBODIA).
Children were central to the revolution because the Khmer Rouge believed that their parents were tainted with capitalism and that they could be easily taught to obey orders and to be loyal to the state. Children were taught to believe that anyone not conforming to the Khmer laws were corrupted and should be punished. Children were also taught torture methods on animals and had to perform tortures and executions. This twisted ideology has put Pol Pot on the same level as Hitler and Stalin.
In January, 1979, this extreme movement finally ended when Phnom Penh fell to the advancing Vietnamese. Pol Pot and other highly ranked Khmer Rouge officials fled the country, mostly to Thailand, and the Khmer Rouge’s main priority was just to survive. The radical organization had dissolved in 1997 – 1999 when Pol Pot died and the last of the Khmer Rouge leaders were either executed or surrendered to the Cambodian government.
Today, even former Khmer Rouge leaders and their families are embracing capitalism, western culture, and many other things that were outlawed during the Khmer Rouge period. Frontline World interviewed many former Khmer Rouge leaders. Nuon Chea, Pol Pot’s number two, said “I respect George Washington. The great seal of the United States, E pluribus unum, is very good.” Pol Pot’s nephew says “The Khmer Rouge regime was hard. Capitalism is easy.” he is now rich off tourist attractions and selling gems. Still in the same video the reporter goes to a school where a former Khmer Rouge official is teaching English to a class, including Pol Pot’s daughter (CAMBODIA). This is ironic because speaking English used to be punishable by death when the Khmer Rouge were in charge. People that lived by and enforced the Khmer Rouge’s extreme ideas and policies it seems have realized that the regime and that way of living were extremely flawed.
Francoise Ponchaud, a French historian, once asked, "How many of those who say they are unreservedly in support of the Khmer revolution would consent to endure one hundredth part of the present sufferings of the Cambodian people?" (Selvakumar). People will support the philosophy of a regime without considering the effect on the individuals of the population. That is what the Khmer Rouge and many people failed to consider during that time and it led to genocide.
The Khmer Rouge’s extremist ideology was near impossible to pull off and the consequences of trying it cost the lives of nearly 2 million people. This form of communism is dead in the modern world, unless it evolves as Russia and China have. We can learn from this genocide and other genocides that extremist views should be controlled and shut down before they get out of hand. The United States is dealing with many current issues that are linked to extremist ideas and we can learn from our mistakes and act on these problems.
Work Cited:
CAMBODIA - Pol Pot's Shadow. Perf. Amanda Pike. Pbs.org. FRONTLINE/WORLD, Oct. 2002. Web. 28 Jan. 2013.
Guess, Barbara. "Why the Cambodian Genocide Occurred." Helium. Helium, 10 Mar. 2009. Web. 23 Jan. 2013.
Locard, Henri. Pol Pot's Little Red Book, the Sayings of Angkar. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Silkworm, 2004. Print.
Selvakumar, Denise L. "Lavinia Selvakumar: History of Cambodian Genocide." Lavinia Selvakumar: History of Cambodian Genocide. UC Santa Barbara, 6 Dec. 2005. Web. 24 Jan. 2013.
Walker, Luke. "Cambodian Genocide | World Without Genocide." Cambodian Genocide | World Without Genocide. World Without Genocide, n.d. Web. 24 Jan. 2013.
The start of this extremist movement lies in Pol Pot, the leader of the Khmer Rouge, who had been introduced to communist ideas when he received a scholarship to further his engineering studies in Paris (Guess). He was an admirer of Mao/Chinese communism, and envisioned the creation of a new Cambodia based on the Maoist-Communist model (Walker).
Maoism sees the rural peasantry as the key revolutionary force which can transform a capitalist society towards socialism. The Khmer Rouge’s interpretation of Maoist communism allowed them to believe that they could create a classless society, just simply by eliminating all social classes except for the poor peasants who work the land.
In 1975 the Khmer Rouge took control over Phnom Penh. Within days the residents of Phnom Penh were forced to leave the city, on a long march to labor camps on the countryside to work in the fields, anyone that couldn’t make the distance was killed. All contact with the West and capitalism was severed and Western practices were outlawed along with money, books and religion. All of these were punishable by torture and death.
To achieve Pol Pot’s extreme communist model, the Khmer Rouge believed that all Cambodians must work as laborers on farms. Anyone that was against or that was thought to be against this system was executed. The first people to be killed were intellectuals, educated people, professionals, monks, religious enthusiasts, ethnic Chinese, Vietnamese, Thai, and even Cambodians with Chinese, Vietnamese or Thai heritage. The Khmer Rouge had a saying "To keep you is no benefit. To destroy you is no loss." (Locard). Unfortunately, survival in Khmer Rouge Cambodia was determined by one’s ability to work, so Cambodia’s elderly, handicapped, ill, and children perished because they could not perform intense physical labor every day.
The Khmer Rouge was also insanely suspicious of normal people including its own members. They vigorously interrogated their members, and frequently executed members on suspicion of treachery or sabotage. In Frontline World’s video on the Cambodian genocide they interviewed a woman whose husband had been killed because they had an outrageous idea that he was working for the CIA even though he had lived in that village his whole life (CAMBODIA).
Children were central to the revolution because the Khmer Rouge believed that their parents were tainted with capitalism and that they could be easily taught to obey orders and to be loyal to the state. Children were taught to believe that anyone not conforming to the Khmer laws were corrupted and should be punished. Children were also taught torture methods on animals and had to perform tortures and executions. This twisted ideology has put Pol Pot on the same level as Hitler and Stalin.
In January, 1979, this extreme movement finally ended when Phnom Penh fell to the advancing Vietnamese. Pol Pot and other highly ranked Khmer Rouge officials fled the country, mostly to Thailand, and the Khmer Rouge’s main priority was just to survive. The radical organization had dissolved in 1997 – 1999 when Pol Pot died and the last of the Khmer Rouge leaders were either executed or surrendered to the Cambodian government.
Today, even former Khmer Rouge leaders and their families are embracing capitalism, western culture, and many other things that were outlawed during the Khmer Rouge period. Frontline World interviewed many former Khmer Rouge leaders. Nuon Chea, Pol Pot’s number two, said “I respect George Washington. The great seal of the United States, E pluribus unum, is very good.” Pol Pot’s nephew says “The Khmer Rouge regime was hard. Capitalism is easy.” he is now rich off tourist attractions and selling gems. Still in the same video the reporter goes to a school where a former Khmer Rouge official is teaching English to a class, including Pol Pot’s daughter (CAMBODIA). This is ironic because speaking English used to be punishable by death when the Khmer Rouge were in charge. People that lived by and enforced the Khmer Rouge’s extreme ideas and policies it seems have realized that the regime and that way of living were extremely flawed.
Francoise Ponchaud, a French historian, once asked, "How many of those who say they are unreservedly in support of the Khmer revolution would consent to endure one hundredth part of the present sufferings of the Cambodian people?" (Selvakumar). People will support the philosophy of a regime without considering the effect on the individuals of the population. That is what the Khmer Rouge and many people failed to consider during that time and it led to genocide.
The Khmer Rouge’s extremist ideology was near impossible to pull off and the consequences of trying it cost the lives of nearly 2 million people. This form of communism is dead in the modern world, unless it evolves as Russia and China have. We can learn from this genocide and other genocides that extremist views should be controlled and shut down before they get out of hand. The United States is dealing with many current issues that are linked to extremist ideas and we can learn from our mistakes and act on these problems.
Work Cited:
CAMBODIA - Pol Pot's Shadow. Perf. Amanda Pike. Pbs.org. FRONTLINE/WORLD, Oct. 2002. Web. 28 Jan. 2013.
Guess, Barbara. "Why the Cambodian Genocide Occurred." Helium. Helium, 10 Mar. 2009. Web. 23 Jan. 2013.
Locard, Henri. Pol Pot's Little Red Book, the Sayings of Angkar. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Silkworm, 2004. Print.
Selvakumar, Denise L. "Lavinia Selvakumar: History of Cambodian Genocide." Lavinia Selvakumar: History of Cambodian Genocide. UC Santa Barbara, 6 Dec. 2005. Web. 24 Jan. 2013.
Walker, Luke. "Cambodian Genocide | World Without Genocide." Cambodian Genocide | World Without Genocide. World Without Genocide, n.d. Web. 24 Jan. 2013.
Project Reflection
For this project we each got to choose a genocide that we were interested in and then research that genocide. We went through two stages of research; everybody made an outline of their genocide and analyzed eight or more sources with at least four primary sources. After that we started to create opposite editorials for our genocide, they were focused on one specific thing about the genocide that we believed/ had an opinion on that could be arguable. The last thing we did for this project was create a political cartoon based on our opinion articles. The genocide that I was most interested in was the Cambodian genocide and I decided to make my opposite editorial on how the Khmer Rouge’s extreme communist ideology caused the genocide. My final cartoon was Pol Pot, the leader of the Khmer Rouge, standing in front of a classroom teaching kids radical communist ideas on the chalkboard.
I went through many drafts and ideas while creating my cartoon. My first draft was just Pol Pot’s face looking over the genocide, skinny people farming the land and a mass grave and pile of skulls nearby. It was sloppy because I knew it was my first draft and I could refine it later. But it was also lacking in originality. It was boring to look at and didn’t have much to do with my op-ed. There was no exaggeration, or irony, or anything interesting about it. On my final draft I spent a lot of time refining Pol Pot’s face, and the classroom, so it is easy to recognize Pol Pot and I exaggerated his body size compared to his head, it gives my artistic skills more of a style and it is more aesthetically pleasing. My final draft was much more creative and communicated my op-ed in an interesting way. I drew Pol Pot as a teacher teaching kids in a classroom, and the point of view is from the back of the classroom. Just moving through multiple drafts is what helped me reach this idea and develop a more interesting style that I am satisfied with.
Opposite editorials were completely new to me but I really enjoyed making it. With essays and writing assignments in the past it has been a lot of regurgitating knowledge that we learned, but this was new and fresh. Everybody, including people with the same genocide, will have very different essays because everybody has their own opinion on their genocide. These opposite editorials were very free and also limiting. We had to write in between 750-1000 words, but we also had a ton a freedom on what we could write about and what are paragraphs are/ how many we have, they just had to connect back to our thesis which Is actually something I struggled with for a bit. I really enjoyed writing my op-ed and I where I can choose what style I want it to be.
For this project we each got to choose a genocide that we were interested in and then research that genocide. We went through two stages of research; everybody made an outline of their genocide and analyzed eight or more sources with at least four primary sources. After that we started to create opposite editorials for our genocide, they were focused on one specific thing about the genocide that we believed/ had an opinion on that could be arguable. The last thing we did for this project was create a political cartoon based on our opinion articles. The genocide that I was most interested in was the Cambodian genocide and I decided to make my opposite editorial on how the Khmer Rouge’s extreme communist ideology caused the genocide. My final cartoon was Pol Pot, the leader of the Khmer Rouge, standing in front of a classroom teaching kids radical communist ideas on the chalkboard.
I went through many drafts and ideas while creating my cartoon. My first draft was just Pol Pot’s face looking over the genocide, skinny people farming the land and a mass grave and pile of skulls nearby. It was sloppy because I knew it was my first draft and I could refine it later. But it was also lacking in originality. It was boring to look at and didn’t have much to do with my op-ed. There was no exaggeration, or irony, or anything interesting about it. On my final draft I spent a lot of time refining Pol Pot’s face, and the classroom, so it is easy to recognize Pol Pot and I exaggerated his body size compared to his head, it gives my artistic skills more of a style and it is more aesthetically pleasing. My final draft was much more creative and communicated my op-ed in an interesting way. I drew Pol Pot as a teacher teaching kids in a classroom, and the point of view is from the back of the classroom. Just moving through multiple drafts is what helped me reach this idea and develop a more interesting style that I am satisfied with.
Opposite editorials were completely new to me but I really enjoyed making it. With essays and writing assignments in the past it has been a lot of regurgitating knowledge that we learned, but this was new and fresh. Everybody, including people with the same genocide, will have very different essays because everybody has their own opinion on their genocide. These opposite editorials were very free and also limiting. We had to write in between 750-1000 words, but we also had a ton a freedom on what we could write about and what are paragraphs are/ how many we have, they just had to connect back to our thesis which Is actually something I struggled with for a bit. I really enjoyed writing my op-ed and I where I can choose what style I want it to be.
The Truth of War
The Truth of War Essay
War changes boys into men and creates scars that last the rest of their lives. All Quiet on the Western Front and Slaughterhouse 5 show you the horrors of the two world wars and the effects on the soldiers that fought them. Being aware and knowing about this is important because war affects every soldier and their families all around the world. Going to war as a soldier strips away your humanity, to a point where you can never see the world the same again.
War puts soldiers in a situation that brings out their animal-like instincts of survival. Remarque’s book All Quiet on the Western Front is about a German soldier in WWI named Paul. On page 67 Paul says, “But the shelling is stronger than everything. It wipes out the sensibilities, I merely crawl still deeper in the coffin, it should protect me, and especially as Death himself lies in it too.” In this part of the book Paul is being shelled while he is in a graveyard. He crawls into a coffin to survive the chaos that is all around him. Paul describes the body in the coffin as death is lying in the coffin but he crawls into it anyways. The shells wipe out all Paul’s senses including his ability to think normally, all that’s left are instincts. This quote shows how as soon as a bombardment starts, Paul knows from experience he has to do anything that will it take to survive, even jump into a coffin as death lies in it. The process of bringing out a soldier’s animal-like instinct, the will to survive, can affect his mind in different ways.
The things a soldier sees and does in war scars his mind and changes the way he sees the world, and how he acts. In All Quiet on the Western Front, Paul says, “Out there I was indifferent and often hopeless- I will never be able to be so again. I was a soldier, and now I am nothing but an agony for myself, for my mother, for everything that is so comfortless and without end.” (Remarque, 185). This is while Paul is on leave. His mother has cancer and his family is in need of money. He just got back from the front and it’s hard for him to adjust back to the world he knew before the war. He thinks of himself as a pain for himself and his mother because his family worries about him and depends on him. He realized that he isn’t indifferent anymore and if something bad happens to him they are affected to. No matter where he goes everything is negative and comfortless. Once Paul became a soldier he became a soldier for life because the war has changed him so much. Sometimes though, experiencing the horrors of war can help people realize that they should focus more on the positive parts of their life.
The terrible experiences of war can also help a soldier enjoy the rest of their life. Slaughterhouse 5 is a book about an awkward soldier named Billy Pilgrim, who becomes a prisoner of war and lives through the firebombing of Dresden. The firebombing of Dresden was one of the worst bombings in history and the author, Kurt Vonnegut, had very similar experiences to Billy. Vonnegut talks about how Billy Pilgrim got married, became rich, and started a family after he got back from WWII (24). Billy survived and had seen thousands of people die in the firebombing of Dresden. After the war, he was traumatized and had shock therapy in the veteran’s hospital. Billy hadn’t had a very good life before the war. But eventually, after the war, Billy started a family of his own and created a made up world in his head so he could keep on going and enjoying life. The crazy part of him helped him believe that everything he had been through couldn’t have gone any other way. Billy’s scars from the war still show and that is why he went crazy but in the end he was accepting and kind of enjoying his life. Part of the reason Billy was able to keep moving forward after the war though is because he didn’t lose or have much to lose during the war.
Friends in war time can keep you sane and give you a good reason to fight your best, but when you lose them, you lose everything that you depended on them for. Remarque says at the end of All Quiet on the Western Front, “Let the months and years come, they can take nothing from me, they can take nothing more. I am so alone, and so without hope that I can confront them without fear.” (295). This is the end of the book right after all of Paul’s friends had died. His friends were his hope and his will to fight so when they died Paul lost hope in everything, and he became severely depressed. Paul cared about his friends more than he cared about himself, and now that his friends are gone he has no will to move forward. Friends and comrades can become everything to a soldier, and Paul is a perfect example. War strengthens friendships but only makes it that much worse and creates scares when you lose what you have.
War has a different effect on everyone and it is something that is very hard to deal with and fully understand. Both books that we have read show you what war is like through a fictional character and how that character dealt with those experiences. Paul had lots of friends to keep him going and give him a shrivel of hope during the war, but when he lost those friends he had no reason to go on and he died in the end. Billy Pilgrim witnessed and lived through one of the worst bombings in history, but he had to go crazy before he could get closure and enjoy life again. Soldiers in real life have very similar experiences and problems that affect them and everybody around them. The truth of war is that once you became a soldier, you can never go back, and you either die or live with what you’ve experienced forever.
War puts soldiers in a situation that brings out their animal-like instincts of survival. Remarque’s book All Quiet on the Western Front is about a German soldier in WWI named Paul. On page 67 Paul says, “But the shelling is stronger than everything. It wipes out the sensibilities, I merely crawl still deeper in the coffin, it should protect me, and especially as Death himself lies in it too.” In this part of the book Paul is being shelled while he is in a graveyard. He crawls into a coffin to survive the chaos that is all around him. Paul describes the body in the coffin as death is lying in the coffin but he crawls into it anyways. The shells wipe out all Paul’s senses including his ability to think normally, all that’s left are instincts. This quote shows how as soon as a bombardment starts, Paul knows from experience he has to do anything that will it take to survive, even jump into a coffin as death lies in it. The process of bringing out a soldier’s animal-like instinct, the will to survive, can affect his mind in different ways.
The things a soldier sees and does in war scars his mind and changes the way he sees the world, and how he acts. In All Quiet on the Western Front, Paul says, “Out there I was indifferent and often hopeless- I will never be able to be so again. I was a soldier, and now I am nothing but an agony for myself, for my mother, for everything that is so comfortless and without end.” (Remarque, 185). This is while Paul is on leave. His mother has cancer and his family is in need of money. He just got back from the front and it’s hard for him to adjust back to the world he knew before the war. He thinks of himself as a pain for himself and his mother because his family worries about him and depends on him. He realized that he isn’t indifferent anymore and if something bad happens to him they are affected to. No matter where he goes everything is negative and comfortless. Once Paul became a soldier he became a soldier for life because the war has changed him so much. Sometimes though, experiencing the horrors of war can help people realize that they should focus more on the positive parts of their life.
The terrible experiences of war can also help a soldier enjoy the rest of their life. Slaughterhouse 5 is a book about an awkward soldier named Billy Pilgrim, who becomes a prisoner of war and lives through the firebombing of Dresden. The firebombing of Dresden was one of the worst bombings in history and the author, Kurt Vonnegut, had very similar experiences to Billy. Vonnegut talks about how Billy Pilgrim got married, became rich, and started a family after he got back from WWII (24). Billy survived and had seen thousands of people die in the firebombing of Dresden. After the war, he was traumatized and had shock therapy in the veteran’s hospital. Billy hadn’t had a very good life before the war. But eventually, after the war, Billy started a family of his own and created a made up world in his head so he could keep on going and enjoying life. The crazy part of him helped him believe that everything he had been through couldn’t have gone any other way. Billy’s scars from the war still show and that is why he went crazy but in the end he was accepting and kind of enjoying his life. Part of the reason Billy was able to keep moving forward after the war though is because he didn’t lose or have much to lose during the war.
Friends in war time can keep you sane and give you a good reason to fight your best, but when you lose them, you lose everything that you depended on them for. Remarque says at the end of All Quiet on the Western Front, “Let the months and years come, they can take nothing from me, they can take nothing more. I am so alone, and so without hope that I can confront them without fear.” (295). This is the end of the book right after all of Paul’s friends had died. His friends were his hope and his will to fight so when they died Paul lost hope in everything, and he became severely depressed. Paul cared about his friends more than he cared about himself, and now that his friends are gone he has no will to move forward. Friends and comrades can become everything to a soldier, and Paul is a perfect example. War strengthens friendships but only makes it that much worse and creates scares when you lose what you have.
War has a different effect on everyone and it is something that is very hard to deal with and fully understand. Both books that we have read show you what war is like through a fictional character and how that character dealt with those experiences. Paul had lots of friends to keep him going and give him a shrivel of hope during the war, but when he lost those friends he had no reason to go on and he died in the end. Billy Pilgrim witnessed and lived through one of the worst bombings in history, but he had to go crazy before he could get closure and enjoy life again. Soldiers in real life have very similar experiences and problems that affect them and everybody around them. The truth of war is that once you became a soldier, you can never go back, and you either die or live with what you’ve experienced forever.
Project Reflection
We had a lot of freedom with this project on what we could do. The assignment was to show our perspective on the truth of war with an essay and a project of our choice. I chose to do a photoshop project because I could see in my head what I wanted to show in my project and photoshop is a lot of fun. Leading up to this project we read two anti-war books, Slaughterhouse 5 and All Quiet on the Western Front. All Quiet on the Western Front shows you what war is like through a German soldier in WWI fighting on the western front. Slaughterhouse 5 is about an awkward American soldier in WWII who becomes a prisoner of war and lives through the firebombing of Dresden. We also conducted seminars, went over both books in detail, took notes, and did a lot of smaller assignments to learn more about war and its effects on soldiers.
This project required all of the habits of heart in mind to succeed but I probably used perspective the most in this project. It’s really hard trying to discover the truth of war for a soldier without being one, and that is why you have to imagine yourselves in the shoes of a soldier like Paul from All Quiet on the Western Front or Billy from Slaughterhouse 5. Without doing that I wouldn't have learned nearly as much or get close to understanding what those characters were feeling in the books. Perspective is probably was probably the most used habit of heart and mind used in this project by everyone in my opinion. A lot of the assignments leading up to our final essays and projects showed us war through different perspectives.
The biggest revision I made to my essay was I added a lot more analysis to my 3rd body paragraph. In my rough draft it wasn’t very long and it sounded like I was saying that Billy had a bad life before the war and the war made him go crazy and have a good life. It probably would have confused the reader a lot about slaughterhouse 5 and it felt out of place in my essay. I changed how I said everything to show that Billy’s scars still show from the war and that’s why he went crazy but going crazy helped him accept everything he has lived through and that it couldn’t have gone any other way. That revision expressed my thoughts better and it just sounds better and smoother to read. I also changed my thesis multiple times from my first draft to my final draft. It started out as saying nobody can understand the truth of war because it’s so complex and has a different effect on everyone. By my final draft it ended up being that going to war as a soldier strips away your humanity to a point where you can never see the world the same again. The first thesis sounds like I have no idea what I am talking about and it would be hard to write a whole essay that could connect to that thesis. The second one fit in really well with my essay and that’s what my perspective on the truth of war is right now.
If I had another week to revise my project and essay I would add more to both and get a lot done. One thing I would add to my photoshop project is I would play around with color schemes more. I could show more about how certain things in life change after war and become kind of bleak and depressing while others never change. On my essay I would probably try to add a little bit more to my analysis and transitions to make all my body paragraphs fit together smoother and connect to my thesis and conclusion a little better. But overall I’m really happy and satisfied with myself with what I got done.
This project required all of the habits of heart in mind to succeed but I probably used perspective the most in this project. It’s really hard trying to discover the truth of war for a soldier without being one, and that is why you have to imagine yourselves in the shoes of a soldier like Paul from All Quiet on the Western Front or Billy from Slaughterhouse 5. Without doing that I wouldn't have learned nearly as much or get close to understanding what those characters were feeling in the books. Perspective is probably was probably the most used habit of heart and mind used in this project by everyone in my opinion. A lot of the assignments leading up to our final essays and projects showed us war through different perspectives.
The biggest revision I made to my essay was I added a lot more analysis to my 3rd body paragraph. In my rough draft it wasn’t very long and it sounded like I was saying that Billy had a bad life before the war and the war made him go crazy and have a good life. It probably would have confused the reader a lot about slaughterhouse 5 and it felt out of place in my essay. I changed how I said everything to show that Billy’s scars still show from the war and that’s why he went crazy but going crazy helped him accept everything he has lived through and that it couldn’t have gone any other way. That revision expressed my thoughts better and it just sounds better and smoother to read. I also changed my thesis multiple times from my first draft to my final draft. It started out as saying nobody can understand the truth of war because it’s so complex and has a different effect on everyone. By my final draft it ended up being that going to war as a soldier strips away your humanity to a point where you can never see the world the same again. The first thesis sounds like I have no idea what I am talking about and it would be hard to write a whole essay that could connect to that thesis. The second one fit in really well with my essay and that’s what my perspective on the truth of war is right now.
If I had another week to revise my project and essay I would add more to both and get a lot done. One thing I would add to my photoshop project is I would play around with color schemes more. I could show more about how certain things in life change after war and become kind of bleak and depressing while others never change. On my essay I would probably try to add a little bit more to my analysis and transitions to make all my body paragraphs fit together smoother and connect to my thesis and conclusion a little better. But overall I’m really happy and satisfied with myself with what I got done.