RD4

It’s Not What You Say, It’s How You Say It

Chaz Hirata

29 April 2011

RD4

In the United States, Americans enjoy many civil liberties that are not granted in other countries. Chief among these rights is the freedom of speech which allows citizens to voice their opinions freely without fear of persecution. It is a right bestowed upon us by our forefathers to insure that Americans do not suffer any religious, journalistic, or verbal restriction or repression. [THESIS] While the First Amendment grants all Americans the freedom of speech, it does not protect the individual from the backlash and condemnation that may ensue as a result of those remarks or observations. [THESIS]

There are people like Ward Churchill who knowingly abuse this valuable right for their own personal benefit. In essence, these individuals are hiding behind the Bill of Rights and liberally interpreting the text to tailor-fit their needs.  When Churchill claimed that the September 11^th attacks were provoked by the United States’ stringent foreign policies, he made a valid point.  However when he insinuated that the civilian workers killed in the World Trade Center bombing were “military targets” and that the real heroes were in fact the airplane hijackers who “manifested the courage of their convictions, willingly expending their own lives in attaining their objectives,” Churchill deservedly encountered harsh criticism and widespread condemnation.  His sentiments were considered extremist and Anti-American, making him a social pariah and eventually costing him his job at the University of Colorado. 

Churchill’s writing style can best be described as aggressive and antagonistic. His essays and books focus on controversial subjects like the US governments’ fight against the Black Panther movement and the systematic displacement of American Indians from their homeland. He is courageously defiant in his wording and his content is far from politically correct. While we must have free-thinkers like Ward Churchill to ruffle some feathers and say what needs to be said, it must be done in an appropriate manner.  

Leo Tsuchiya writes, “Speakers like Ward Churchill must be carefully monitored and kept in check. Speakers like Churchill make nonsensical metaphors and use many controversial and emotionally charged material specifically to get a rise out of people. By using the "little Eichmanns" metaphor Churchill is using sensationalism to increase interest in his book and essay. His writing can't stand on his own so he is creating a stir and interest by using such an emotionally charged term. Speakers like Churchill who use this type of material just to draw attention to their own works or agenda must not be allowed to thrive or it will overshadow the people who do not employ sensationalist tactics and have real material that people should be aware of.”

I agree with Leo that the crucial mistake made by Churchill was the unsympathetic and abrasive tone of his essay. His choice of words was off-putting and extremely offensive to the families of those killed in the September 11^th attacks. The author appears to be out of touch with reality, unwilling or unable to see eye-to-eye with his intended audience. As we move into the 21^st century, many Americans are still not in tune with the world around us. When Churchill reiterates that point in his essay, you can sense his distaste for his fellow countrymen. He writes, “As a whole, the American public greeted these revelations with yawns. There were, after all, far more pressing things than the unrelenting misery/death of a few hundred thousand Iraqi tikes to be concerned with. Getting ‘Jeremy’ and ‘Ellington’ to their weekly soccer game, for instance, or seeing to it that little ‘Tiffany’ and ‘Ashley’ had just the right roll-neck sweaters to go with their new cords.” (Churchill) 

He goes on to disparage and belittle his fellow countrymen by questioning their ethical fortitude in allowing an act of “deliberate genocide” to occur, later insinuating that the World Trade Center bombings were some richly deserved retaliation or as he put it, merely “chickens coming home to roost.” These statements struck a nerve in the general populace. There were angry letters and over 100 death threats aimed at Churchill as outraged citizens protested his personal analysis of the September 11^th attacks.

In his essay, Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens, Churchill writes, “True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire and they did so both willingly and knowingly. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it.” (Churchill)

These statements allege that these attacks represented America “reaping what it sowed.” However, the 9/11 attacks cannot be justified solely based on the United States prior transgressions. Jeremy Hine states, “In the aftermath of September, 11, 2001 Ward Churchill's essay made many valid points on the causation of the 9/11 attacks as he tried to come to an intellectual understanding of how such attacks could have happened.  However, his insensitivity and offensiveness when using certain correlations with 9/11 victims made many of his arguments weaker. This being said, we cannot silence such speech. I think many Americans are offended by the notion that we are in some way implicit in what happened on September 11, which I think is another reason so many jumped to attack Churchill. Freedom of speech means we have to accept and allow statements and sentiments that we don't agree with, in order that we can make statements that others will not agree with.  Although there are several things I disagree on with Churchill, I would be the first to stand up and defend his right to speak his opinion. I have strong opinions myself, and I would want the same protection to say what I think.” 

I would argue that most Americans are aware of our country’s history of political missteps and understand that terrorism is one of its consequences. However, Churchill’s declaration that civilians killed in the September 11^th attacks were somehow comparable to Nazis could be the most ludicrous statement ever made. Just because these citizens worked for the US government in an administrative building, Churchill sees them as a justifiable target for terrorism? This guilt by association would incriminate us all as American citizens. If this is the case, who is to say that Churchill himself is not partially to blame? How can he feel comfortable chastising others about their lack of action when he chose to stand by and do nothing?

In his addendum, Churchill finishes by saying, “I'll readily admit that I've been far less than thorough, and quite likely wrong about a number of things. For instance, it may not have been (only) the ghosts of Iraqi children who made their appearance that day. It could as easily have been some or all of their butchered Palestinian cousins. Or maybe it was some or all of the at least 3.2 million Indochinese who perished as a result of America's sustained and genocidal assault on Southeast Asia (1959-1975), not to mention the millions more who've died because of the sanctions imposed thereafter. Perhaps there were a few of the Korean civilians massacred by US troops at places like No Gun Ri during the early ‘50s, or the hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians ruthlessly incinerated in the ghastly fire raids of World War II (only at Dresden did America bomb Germany in a similar manner). And, of course, it could have been those vaporized in the militarily pointless nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” (Churchill)

I imagine that Ward Churchill’s noticeable distaste for America stems from his Native American heritage and the federal government’s long history of exploitation of American Indians. As a professor of ethnic studies, he stepped outside of his area of expertise and his ideas were met with hostility and anger.  His essay dehumanized the victims of the World Trade Center bombings and characterized them as mindless drones working for the powers that be. Instead of celebrating them as hard-working Americans who had their lives ended too soon, he rationalized that their deaths were justified and even necessary. In a 2004 interview Churchill was quoted stating, “One of the things [I’ve] suggested is that it may be that more 9/11s are necessary.” 

We must remember many Americans lost important family members and loved ones in this tragedy and are still in mourning. Although Ward Churchill was unaffected by this tragedy, September 11^th will be remembered by many as the day when their lives changed forever. Instead of honoring those who perished on that fateful day, Churchill chose to denigrate the victims and their families.  For that, Ward Churchill deserves nothing more than our contempt and disdain.

Works Cited

Churchill, Ward. “Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens.” Pockets of Resistance #11. September 2001. Web. 21 April 2011. http://www2.hawaii.edu/~jamess/freespee/w_church.htm

 

Hine, Jeremy. “Defend Churchill” Online posting. 18 April 2011. Laulima Discussion. 27 April 2011. https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/site/KAP.XLSENG215js.201130/page/dce5cccd-f9ac-4ad1-8c6b-6896281bf756

 

Tsuchiya, Leo. “Attack Ward Churchill” Online posting. 15 April 2011. Laulima Discussion. 27 April 2011. https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/site/KAP.XLSENG215js.201130/page/dce5cccd-f9ac-4ad1-8c6b-6896281bf756

FD3

The Tangled Web We Weave

Chaz Hirata

1 April 2011

FD #3

There is an old proverb that is often repeated by parents and teachers, “Honesty is the best policy.” That familiar saying is ingrained in our minds at a young age, a reminder to always be truthful regardless of consequence. Honesty represents a basic moral dilemma that we deal with every day. [THESIS]During our formative years, we are taught that to be deemed honest is to be regarded as respectable and trustworthy. However it seems that even at a young age, we are fully capable of swearing by and defending the lies and half-truths we tell. [THESIS] 

If honesty is the best policy, why do so many of us lie on a regular basis? To answer that question, we must first examine why we feel obligated to lie. Dr. Robert Feldman believes that he has found the answer. "It's [all] tied in with self-esteem,”" says University of Massachusetts psychologist. "We find that as soon as people feel that their self-esteem is threatened, they immediately begin to lie at higher levels (Lloyd)."  

An example of his findings has been published in the Journal of Basic and Applied Psychology. His experiment called for two test subjects to be videotaped while participating in a normal conversation. The participants were complete strangers and the topic of discussion was immaterial. After the dialogue was completed, Dr. Feldman asked each of the subjects to watch the video of the conversation and identify any part of the conversation that was not entirely true. 

Initially, every single test subject assured Dr. Feldman that they were indeed telling the truth. However, upon reviewing the videotape of their conversation, the participants “were genuinely surprised to discover they had said something inaccurate.” In the end, the Feldman’s analysis found that 60 percent of people had lied at least once during the 10-minute conversation, saying an average of 2.92 inaccurate things (Lloyd).

Although 60 percent of the test subjects revealed that they were not completely honest, these numbers should be expected as we have already acknowledged the fact that humans lie. Furthermore, since the test subjects were complete strangers, it is somewhat surprising that the participants did not lie or embellish more. There was no substantial reason for the subjects to tell the truth, which may account for the larger number of “little white lies.”  

This data also proves that human beings will lie instinctively. There is no reason to try to impress a complete stranger that you will possibly never see again, yet we still find ourselves telling tales of grandeur and weaving webs of deceit. But are human beings really natural-born liars? Is it a part of our DNA, a trait that has been embedded in our minds since birth? In his blog for the website Psychology Today, Dr. Alex Lickerman tells a story about his son Cruise to detail a young child’s evolution of lying. 

While attempting to toilet train their young boy Cruise, Dr. Lickerman and his wife would place their son on a small toilet and urge him to, “Pee pee in the potty.” This phrase was repeated over and over as they tried to encourage the child to properly use the facilities. To keep his attention Alex would read to his son during toilet training, which Cruise enjoyed immensely.   

This process continued until one late night when it was time for Cruise to go to sleep. As they were tucking their son, he grabbed his diaper with his hand and exclaimed, “Pee pee on potty. Pee pee on potty.” Having just changed his wet diaper a few moments ago, the couple knew that Cruise had already relieved himself and didn’t need to go again. Dr. Lickerman and his wife quickly realized that at 20 month of age, Cruise had already learned how to lie. In hopes of staying up later and listening his father read him a book, the young boy had told his first fib without even knowing it. 

It seems that human beings are natural born liars, but it is still in our power to stop. Each of us possesses the inherent ability to be honest, we simply choose not to. To change that, remember the times when you have been deceived and make certain that you never replicate those same misdeeds. As an example, for the past year and a half, my future wife and I had been planning our wedding. Both of us are very close to my co-workers and wanted them all to be able to attend. The restaurant I work at has always been closed on Sundays so we purposely scheduled the wedding on a Sunday so the entire staff would be off. Less than two months before the big day, the owner of the restaurant decided to begin opening on Sundays. Naturally, this worries my fiancé and me because we have everything already paid for and the date set. Many of my co-workers had already booked hotel rooms for the night and one of them was to perform the wedding toast as well. The owner promised to find replacements to pick up everyone’s shifts and assured us that, “It wouldn’t be a problem.” However, as the date drew near, the owner did not schedule any replacements and refused to close the restaurant for the day. Needless to say, this was extremely disappointing to us and put a small damper on an otherwise perfect day.

The story demonstrates the importance of honesty and following through on your promises, as they are two of the most endearing qualities that an individual can possess. Sengchanh Luanglaj writes, “I feel being honest at all times is a righteous and honorable characteristic to obtain because it demonstrates the ability to have the strength to speak the truth against all odds. It is when you have strong convictions of what is morally and ethically right. Once this sometimes challenging characteristic is acquired, it allows you and others to “trust” in each other. In return it is the ultimate gain for us human being, it allows us a positive and secure feeling in all aspect of our lives.”

It seems that the most commonly utilized rational for deceit is the idea that a lie is actually “for the greater good” or that “the end justifies the means.” Unfortunately, these statements are just excuses meant to rationalize our misdeeds. Most lies are formed in order to protect ourselves or something we deem worthy of protecting. Frequently, the lies simply end up compounding the problem and making the situation more complicated than before. There is a memorable line by Cary Grant in the 1963 movie titled Charade. When asked by Audrey Hepburn "Why do people have to tell lies?" Grant answers, "Usually it's because they want something. They are afraid the truth won't get it for them." If the truth can’t get you what you want, then it’s almost certainly not worth getting.

Works Cited

Lickerman, Alex. “Happiness in This World: Why We Lie.” Psychology Today 8 March 2010. Web. 28 March 2011. [http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/happiness-in-world/201003/why-we-lie]

Lloyd, Robin. “Why We Lie.” Live Science 15 May 2006. Web. 28 March 2011. [http://www.livescience.com/772-lie.html]

Luanglaj, Sengchanh. “Discussion 2: Honesty in Employment, White Lie, Honesty.” Online Posting. 17 March 2011. Laulima Discussion. 30 March 2011. [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/site/KAP.XLSENG215js.201130/page/dce5cccd-f9ac-4ad1-8c6b-6896281bf756]

Log of Completed Activities

_X__ Mar. 3- Intro to Paper #3. Read the Guidelines for Paper #3.
_X__ Mar. 7- Complete readings for paper #3 for paper #3.
_X__ Mar. 11- Laulima Discussion #1
_X__ Mar. 18- Laulima Discussion #2
_X__ Spring Recess Mar. 21-25
_X__ Apr. 1- Submit RD3 [50 pts] Review the guidelines.
_X__ Apr. 4- Submit three RD3 evaluations [50 pts] Review the guidelines.
_X__ Apr. 6- Submit FD3 [125 pts] Review the guidelines.

RD3

The Tangled Web We Weave

Chaz Hirata

1 April 2011

RD #3

There is an old proverb that is often repeated by parents and teachers, “Honesty is the best policy.” That familiar saying is ingrained in our minds at a young age, a reminder to always be truthful, regardless of consequence. Honesty represents a basic moral dilemma that we deal with every day. [THESIS]During our formative years, we are taught that to be deemed honest is to be regarded as respectable and trustworthy. However it seems that even at a young age, we are fully capable of swearing by and defending the lies and half-truths we tell [THESIS].

If honesty is the best policy, why do so many of us lie on a regular basis? To answer that question, we must first examine why we feel obligated to lie. Dr. Robert Feldman believes that he has found the answer.  "It's [all] tied in with self-esteem,”" says University of Massachusetts psychologist. "We find that as soon as people feel that their self-esteem is threatened, they immediately begin to lie at higher levels (Lloyd)."   

An example of his findings has been published in the Journal of Basic and Applied Psychology. His experiment called for two test subjects to be videotaped while participating in a normal conversation. The participants were complete strangers and the topic of discussion was immaterial. After the dialogue was completed, Dr. Feldman asked each of the subjects to watch the video of the conversation and identify any part of the conversation that was not entirely true. 

Initially, every single test subject assured Dr. Feldman that they were indeed telling the truth. However, upon reviewing the videotape of their conversation, the participants “were genuinely surprised to discover they had said something inaccurate.” In the end, the Feldman’s analysis found that 60 percent of people had lied at least once during the 10-minute conversation, saying an average of 2.92 inaccurate things (Lloyd).

Although 60 percent of the test subjects revealed that they were not completely honest, these numbers should be expected as we have already acknowledged the fact that humans lie. Furthermore, since the test subjects were complete strangers, it is somewhat surprising that the participants did not lie or embellish more. There was no substantial reason for the subjects to tell the truth, which may account for the larger number of “little white lies.” 

This data also proves that human beings will lie instinctively. There is no reason to try to impress a complete stranger that you will possibly never see again, yet we still find ourselves telling tales of grandeur and weaving webs of deceit. But are human beings really natural-born liars?  Is it a part of our DNA, a trait that we that is embedded in our brains since birth? In his blog for the website Psychology Today, Dr. Alex Lickerman tells a story about his son Cruise to detail a young child’s evolution of lying. 

While attempting to toilet train their young boy Cruise, Dr. Lickerman and his wife would place their son on a small toilet and urge him to, “Pee pee in the potty.” This phrase was repeated over and over as they tried to encourage the child to properly use the facilities. To keep his attention Alex would read to his son during toilet training, which Cruise enjoyed immensely.   

This process continued until one late night when it was time for Cruise to go to sleep. As they were tucking their son, he grabbed his diaper with his hand and exclaimed, “Pee pee on potty. Pee pee on potty.” Having just changed his wet diaper a few moments ago, the couple knew that Cruise had already relieved himself and didn’t need to go again. Dr. Lickerman and his wife quickly realized that at 20 month of age, Cruise had already learned how to lie. In hopes of staying up later and listening his father read him a book, the young boy had told his first fib without even knowing it. 

It seems that human beings are natural born liars, but it is still in our power to stop. Each of us possesses the inherent ability to be honest, we simply choose not to. To change that, remember the times when you have been deceived and make certain that you never replicate those same misdeeds. As an example, for the past year and a half, my future wife and I had been planning our wedding. Both of us are very close to my co-workers and wanted them all to be able to attend. The restaurant I work at has always been closed on Sundays so we purposely scheduled the wedding on a Sunday so the entire staff would be off. Less than two months before the big day, the owner of the restaurant decides to begin opening on Sundays. Naturally, this worries my fiancé and I because we have everything already paid for and the date set. Many of my co-workers had already booked hotel rooms for the night and one of them was to perform the wedding toast as well. The owner promised to find replacements to pick up everyone’s shifts and assured us that, “It wouldn’t be a problem.” However, as the date drew near, the owner did not schedule any replacements and refused to close the restaurant for the day. Needless to say, this was extremely disappointing to us and put a small damper on an otherwise perfect day.

The story demonstrates the importance of honesty and following through on your promises, as they are two of the most endearing qualities that an individual can possess. Sengchanh Luanglaj writes, “I feel being honest at all times is a righteous and honorable characteristic to obtain because it demonstrates the ability to have the strength to speak the truth against all odds. It is when you have strong convictions of what is morally and ethically right. Once this sometimes challenging characteristic is acquired, it allows you and others to “trust” in each other. In return it is the ultimate gain for us human being, it allows us a positive and secure feeling in all aspect of our lives.”

It seems that the most commonly utilized rational for deceit is the idea that a lie is actually “for the greater good” or that “the end justifies the means.” Unfortunately, these statements are just excuses meant to rationalize our misdeeds. Most lies are formed in order to protect ourselves or something we deem worthy of protecting. Frequently, the lies simply end up compounding the problem and making the situation more complicated than before. There is a memorable line by Cary Grant in the 1963 movie titled Charade. When asked by Audrey Hepburn "Why do people have to tell lies?" Grant answers, "Usually it's because they want something. They are afraid the truth won't get it for them." I believe that if the truth can’t get you what you want, then it’s almost certainly not worth getting.

Works Cited

Lickerman, Alex. “Happiness in This World: Why We Lie.” Psychology Today 8 March 2010. Web. 28 March 2011. [http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/happiness-in-world/201003/why-we-lie]

 

Lloyd, Robin. “Why We Lie.” Live Science 15 May 2006. Web. 28 March 2011.[http://www.livescience.com/772-lie.html]

 

Luanglaj, Sengchanh. “Discussion 2: Honesty in Employment, White Lie, Honesty.” Online Posting. 17 March 2011. Laulima Discussion. 30 March 2011. [https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/site/KAP.XLSENG215js.201130/page/dce5cccd-f9ac-4ad1-8c6b-6896281bf756]