Hansel: Drug War

http://www.leftycartoons.com/

There is very little that I can say regarding the war on drugs that has not already been stomped into the ground repeatedly by anyone with the proper ability to observe and analyze national occurrences.  Despite the fortune being dumped into the drug war, no improvement has been made.  (Sounds kind of like public education, but that's a whole other  issue.)  There are also other costs of the drug war, including broken up families, loss of constitutional rights, and spots in America's already severely overcrowded prisons.  Personally, I do not think that any sort of unity between Mexico and the United States, nor any sort of improvements in the policies will benefit the Drug War. Call me a pessimist, but drug policies have been tested and failed for entirely too long in America.  One would think that the government would pick up on this sort of consistent failure in policy, but what can you say?  Our friend Mario claimed that marijuana legalization would help the drug problem in the United States, and I strongly agree with him.  Often, in the legalization arguments, I hear that government regulation of the product will help prevent from unsafe condition of marijuana.  This, on the other hand, I do not even agree with.  What parents often worry about with pot is that some teenager is going to wind up with a bag of shitty Mexican dirt weed that is laced with cocaine and is going to kill their little  white Rastafarian poser son. This is a problem that is not only highly uncommon, but is also a problem that could be solved almost entirely by legalization of marijuana. Said white Rastafarian poser son is not very apt to visit the hospital when he starts feeling a little too funny from this tainted bag of herb, due to the regulations on his previous activities.  If companies were able to compete with marijuana sales on the terms of quality of the product, it will result in safer bags.  Said "shitty Mexican dirt weed" will become extinct, not to say that we would no longer import the product from Mexico, especially given how much America loves to consume other nations' goods. This will result in legal, less dangerous methods of crossing the border.  Let's say, for the sake of continuing the suburb boy narrative, pot is legalized, and this boy, for whatever reason, still buys pot from his friend down at the alley by Piggly Wiggly.  If this bag is tainted, he is much more apt to go to the hospital and get treatment.  This situation would be practically extinct in the days of legalization.  The previously mentioned point, in my opinion, would not only apply to marijuana, but to cocaine.  Obviously, the still existing laws regarding cocaine would be much more harsh as to refraining from driving, how much is legal to own, the age limit.  The points I hear against cocaine are often regarding the quality and the quantity.  People are afraid that the product will have other harmful, deadly contents, which is a problem eradicated by legalization.  Also, people worry that they will overdose.  Of course, this would still exist in the days of legalization, but treatment centers and regulations would help those in need of such just as treatment for smokers and alcoholics already exist.  I know several other points that support legalization, but I do not want to ramble on.  If you would like to hear more points regarding legalization, you should follow the link I put at the bottom regarding such.

http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/  

Government using ENRON-esque accounting technique to lie about Drug War costs?  Fancy that!

If you really really care about prohibition, particularly regarding marijuana, this presentation by Loyola's own Dr. D'Amico, will capture your fancy.

Thank you for reading, please enjoy the links I put up.  Most of them are from a website run by the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a "think tank" of sorts for Austrian economics and libertarian theory. I spend a lot of my day on this site.

Hansel: American History X

        American History X showcases notions of white supremacy while also presenting interjections. Few of these interjections are heard out, however. An example is the dinner scene in which Derek rants about Rodney King’s trial. Murray’s opinions are heard, but he presents them rather meekly, thus stripping his argument of its validity, in a sense. Absolutely no interjections are heard when Derek is being lectured by his father on his problems with Dr. Sweeney’s teaching style. Also, Derek gives a speech to all of his white supremacist cronies in their younger stages of bigoted organization. Most of the prejudiced opinions are presented in monologue form, as if giving the floor to these views. One could claim that this glorifies the opinions, which I began to believe myself until I took on a new standpoint on the screenplay. I think David McKenna wrote the screenplay this way to help the viewer hear the unpopular Neo-Nazi viewpoints and think of his or her own rebuttals instead of being spoon-fed a certain opinion. This assumes that the view is not a neo-Nazi, however. Neo-Nazis might interpret this movie as an inaccurate depiction or try to point out faults in Derek’s character that led to him losing sight of such a noble cause. I’m not exactly the consultant for that, however.

        Personally, I respect Tony Kaye for involving such harsh images in the film.  It helped portray the gruesome realities of impressionable teenagers of the lower class looking for a cause and meaning to their lives. Jarring portrayals such as the shower rape scene, the curb stomp scene, and the final death of Danny scene leave strong images in the viewers’ minds. These strong images leave lasting effects. The film shows how there is virtually no solution to the prejudice and racism will always exist among lower class areas of the world. The government cannot do anything about it, because although prejudice has gradually decline through the history of mankind, it will never get to a complete racial blindness.  While I am in no way prejudice, I believe that is how a significant part of the world functions.  People will always find a way to divide themselves, no matter how well the world is connected through information and communication. 

Since I feel really bad for being such a Debbie Downer, I’ll post a lovely gif to brighten things up...

Images acquired from www.ebaumsworld.com and www.tumblr.com, respectively.

BONUS:  Here's a really cool video to watch that's somewhat related to my rantings.  It's particularly interesting if you're into sociology or psychology.

Hansel: Good Night and Good Luck

Good Night and Good Luck and The Crucible both employ the theme of McCarthyism in the simultaneous use of parallelism.  Good Night and Good Luck paralleled McCarthyism with government actions such as the Patriot Act and the constant fear of terrorism.  The Crucible, however, paralleled the Salem Witch Trials with McCarthyism, which was a current issue when Arthur Miller published the Tony Award winning play in 1953.  What George Clooney was trying to portray as director and co-screenwriter of the film was quite reminiscent of Arthur Miller’s intent.  Both of the films offer jarring social commentary for their appropriate times, but I prefer to compare Good Night and Good Luck with one of my favorite films that just so happens to relate to the Red Scare:  Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.  These two films offer commentary on the United States’ dealings with Russia and communism, but in different lights.  Dr.  Strangelove is more of a humorous interpretation of the Red Scare.  This is evident through the constant use of phallic symbols, character parts, and utter exaggeration of ideals scarily similar to that of actual government officials at the time.  Good Night and Good Luck is more of a haunting rendition designed to make the audience more aware through emotional response more serious than that of the satirical Dr. Strangelove, shown by the stoic line delivery, the constant smoke stained shots, and the almost always intimate proxemics.  Though their intents differed, Stanley Kubrick and George Clooney used similar directing styles for their films.  One that particularly stood out was the use of black and white.  Also, the use of tight framing in practically all of Night is reminiscent of the office scenes in Dr. Strangelove.  One directorial facet of Clooney’s that I particularly enjoyed in the film was his use of music playing over scenes without hearing the actual scenes.  Kubrick employs this technique in the final mushroom cloud scene of Dr. Strangelove.  Finally, I have to note the aspect of Good Night and Good Luck that originally caused the link between the film and Kubrick’s.  In class, Tuesday, Prof.  McCay noted the aluminum ad that included a farmer shoveling manure, inherently implying what?  BULLSHIT.  That is exactly what American citizens were being fed through the media in the 50’s.  This type of symbolism is reminiscent of Kubrick’s use of cigars, missiles, planes, and god-knows-what-else as phallic symbols.  If I begin to think of any more parallels or interesting contrasts between the two films, I will add them to the 
blog.


Images aquired from http://dc340.4shared.com/ and http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com, respectively.

Hansel: Good

Maurice and Halder’s friendship starts out with Maurice being the more youthful character, wanting to live freely and spontaneously.  Maurice is sort of the hothead as some would put it.  Halder, however is the one who gets stepped on by life in the sense that he tries very hard to keep things going well for himself, which is exhibited in scene four in which he is hectically trying to take care of his mother while running a family.  He is tied down with more responsibility.  As the film continues and Halder becomes an SS officer, the roles begin to switch in the sense that Halder eventually loses his family for a younger woman, thus voiding responsibility.  He eventually does not have to take care of his mother anymore.  Maurice, on the other hand is being stepped on and discriminated by the increasing power of the Nazi Party.  The ultimate switching of roles is the scene in which Maurice, trying to keep what shred of dignity he has, begs Halder multiples times to purchase a train ticket to Paris for him.  We see Maurice belittled, similarly to Halder’s fear and belittlement in scene one.  Even the shots are similar:  in the way that Halder was projecting his discomfort at the beginning of the scene while sitting across from the SS officer, Maurice project his sitting across from a new, changed Halder.  The film depicts how their decisions put them in different situations, as well.  Halder cracks and joins the party, thus giving him privileges.  Maurice stays strong in his beliefs, even hard-headed, while under the pressure and does not finally decided to move out until it is too late for him to even acquire a ticket out of the country.  Good is a scathing commentary on human nature under extreme social conditions such as the Holocaust.  One would normally think that staying strong under pressure and fighting the flawed system would end up positively for a man’s well being.  Maurice’s evolution through the film shows how this proves untrue.  Similarly, Halder’s seemingly immoral decisions prove beneficial in the social sense.  Both of them suffer in the psychological sense, however.  Therein lies the horror of the Holocaust.  The film also might cause the viewer to think the he or she would never act as Halder did.  His decisions cannot be viewed as such, however, because people such as college students today have no idea what it is like to live under the conditions that Germans did in the 30’s.  

This film reminded me of a book I had read around eighth grade, titled The Wave.  Good and The Wave are similar in the fact that they both show how easy it is to get caught up in grouping. Also, they both exhibit the acceptance of those in the groups and the mistreatment of those who refuse to join the groups.    

 

Now how do you argue with such a noble cause as that?

Image acquired from http://www.isthisthechangeweneed.com

 

Hansel: str8 up G

My name is Stephen Hansel and I am from Slidell, Louisiana, which is an unexciting suburb on the north shore.  Needless to say, I am quite elated to be in a new college environment.  I enjoy film, music, and business.  I can sing, but I usually play guitar, bass, and drums.  I'm in a band called Yellow Light Accelerators, and we give away our music for free.  I enjoy wearing ties and oxfords, because I dress for success! (It’s actually because I’m painfully narcissistic.)  In addition, my favorite kind of music is Sam Cooke, Thelonious Monk, Bilal, and Caddywhompus.  I enjoy Sam Cooke because his singing style is soulful, adding a certain spontaneous element into his performance.  I love Caddywhompus because I feel that their style is close to my personality, like the songwriter and I are similar people judging strictly from the music.  My favorite genres include R & B, jazz, and noise rock.  Lately, I've been enjoying voice over other instruments, mostly due to the fun of performing and expressing oneself through vocalizing and various other techniques that I don’t even realize I use.  Politics and Reel Life will be an exciting class because I enjoy films, particularly regarding history and politics such as Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, The Public Enemy, and Apocalypse Now. I find myself reading more non-fiction and economics journals; however, I want to read more of the classics (hence, my future choice of fun English classes). It’s just easier for me to get through non-fiction because I enjoy knowledge and statistics, which is the same reason I greatly prefer college football to the National Football League.  I have never been outside of the country, although I do plan to study abroad, possibly in Europe. (I’m totally in it for the food.)  As far as academics goes, my major is Marketing under the College of Business.  Today, I signed up for various clubs including University Planning Board, NORML, Queer-Straight Alliance, Economics Club, and the Howlin' Wolves.  I figure I'll try every club that looks interesting and be more involved in the ones which I prefer.  I strongly look forward to this class and discussing film with my peers.