I need to clarify a few points of my topic. I am really interested in learning how the psychology of propaganda like classical conditioning and other techniques affect the viewers. I am also interested in how this affects war and the world around people living in a time of war and how these people act differently due to the effects of propaganda. I think that propaganda acts almost like a product that an organization or political party is trying to sell the public. The person behind the image or video wants to persuade the viewer and use this information to change the world around them by manipulating their views of the environment that surrounds them.

Orientalism is correlated to the topic of the psychology of propaganda because they can both be seen in media and entertainment in the world today. This topic that really interests me and I could see myself writing my research paper with Orientalism in mind. I'd like to specifically focus on the Middle East, since I myself am Middle Eastern and conflicts in the Middle East and America seem to be very relevant to what is happening today in the world. These events include the conflicts in Syria and the Israeli-Palestine conflict.

Events like the San Bernardino shooting and presidential candidate Donald Trump's views have shown the serious conflicts with the war on terror. These effects have all brought up the question of torture and who should be tortured. These questions and ideas about the view of the torturer and of the person being tortured is heavily influenced by the media and entertainment. The events and outlook of Middle Eastern countries have affected America's use of torture in entertainment and is a type of propaganda used to make Americans view the Middle East as the source of terror. It instills this "Us versus Them" attitude on those who are being tortured and affects the world either at a national or global level.

Currently, terrorism has been a big topic discussed not only in politics but in people's everyday lives. Terrorism is feared by many and it is very controversial on how to handle the torturing others. Conflicts like the Geneva Convention make some people believe that torturing terrorist is legally acceptable because the terrorist groups are not technically a nation. The problem with this is that since terrorists are not a part of their own nation many people who are not terrorists are being tortured also. What should America do? Should we assume that everyone is a terrorist? What makes a person a terrorist?

The event of the San Bernardino shooting that had happened a few months ago is an example of the unclear and stereotyped views of a terrorist. In the beginning of the investigation, the couple had not been linked to terrorism but had done a horrendous act. Later on, in the investigation, it was only after they had discovered that the wife had written a post on Facebook that indicated that she was an ISIS sympathizer. This argues that if a person had done the same act but was not linked to ISIS they would not be considered a terrorist. How does this make sense?

The scare of terrorism seems to have the American people linking terrorism to the Middle East in general. As an individual with roots from the Middle East, I can understand the stereotyping and discrimination I have received due to the color of my skin and the origins of my blood. This individual discrimination on people of the Middle East is seen on a larger scale with the fact of torture. Many people that have been mistakenly tortured and have been tortured because they "look like" a terrorist. The famous video game Grand Theft Auto Five has an example of this in a torture scene implemented in the game. The scene depicts a man from Azerbaijan, which in the video game " is bounded by the Caspian Sea to the east, Russia to the north, Georgia to the northwest, Armenia to the west, and Iran to the south.". In the game, this man is seen as the "Other" solely based on the reason that he is from the country that the terrorist in the game is from. The man ends up being a scapegoat for the terrorist group but this is not known before he gets tortured. The video depicts the torture as correct and that is was the duty of the man to do so. Phrases like "Do your patriotic duty" and "The nation demands it" are yelled at the torturer. This use of torture in the game seems to normalize torture and makes the torturer seem like a hero. This is propaganda that further instills the idea of "Us versus Them" in American culture.

This type of influence from the media needs to stop. It only makes torture seem normal and causes people to be careless about who they torture and how violence is handled. Torture depicted in entertainment and media makes people view violence as heroic and does not show the torture victim's perspective or how they are feeling about being tortured. The blindness to the severity of torture is seen from current political candidate Donald Trump. Trump stands for torture and thinks that terrorist and their families should be sentenced to death. He also thinks of  "all foreign Muslims as suspects by barring them from entry to the United States." His extreme comments on the torture of these people are seen as stereotyping and is due to the fear of terrorism that the American people have. Trump is using this "Us versus Them" mentality to get the vote, but he uses very unintelligible tactics. One example is the use of stereotyping. In his action to hinder foreign Muslims from entering the country, he is only further expanding the idea that all Muslims are terrorist which is far from the truth.

A woman, Rose the Riveter, flexing her arm with the caption "We Can Do It!"

"Uncle Sam" pointing at the viewer with the caption " I Want You For U.S Army Nearest Recruiting Station"

During World War I the spread of propaganda became extremely popular with the distribution of posters. Lithography was a popular choice for creating posters due to the fact that it was very easily reproducible. The image above titled "I want you for U.S. Army : nearest recruiting station" crafted by James Montgomery Flagg was a very popular image during World War I.  The  image was created with lithography and author David Lubin in his article titled "Losing Sight: War, Authority, and Blindness in British and American Visual Cultures, 1914-22" notes that the image " ...printed more than four million copies of the colour lithograph, making the object, in the artist’s [,James Montgomery Flagg,] words, ‘the most famous poster in the world'..." (Lubin 802-803). In many cases I agree with James Montgomery Flagg. The poster expresses a symbol not only popular during World War I but has also been a symbol that is widely recognized by almost all American's today. I think that "Uncle Sam" is just as great of a symbol to represent America as is The Statue of Liberty.

Lubin mentions that Flagg was a part of the group called 'the Vigilantes' who quote, "their stated purpose was ' to drive the peace-at-any-price men to cover, to arouse the youth of the nation to their duties in peace and war, and to carry on a propaganda that will thrill the country' " (Lubin 803). I believe that propaganda of this sort did help bring in more troops because the image is a very personal one (Lubin 804). It points at the specific audience, establishing more of a personal duty to fight in the war. Lubin also notes that "he [Uncle Sam] subtly reinforced America’s self-characterization as a nation based on loyalty to principle rather than people. Second, by treating Uncle Sam sardonically, Flagg played up Americans’ self-flattering view of themselves as a folksy people who always enjoy a good joke" (Lubin 804). Lubin's analysis insinuates that Americans looked at this poster with a sense of loyalty and humor. These two aspects, in my opinion, made people at the time want to join the war because it made the war seem less gruesome and more of a happy and patriotic occasion.

Wilfred Owen seems to counteract my notion in his famous poem "Dulce et Decorum Est". It is seen from the poem that Owen's interpretation of war is more realistic and gruesome. Unlike the poster mentioned above, the poem has no humor what so ever. It includes horrendous imagery of the war like "But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;/ Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots" (6-7). Owen also reveals the horrid reality of war in the lines "Dim through the misty panes and thick green light,/As under a green sea, I saw him drowning" (13-14). In these lines he describes the death of another soldier experienced right in front of his own eyes. This reality is not even hinted at whatsoever in the poster above. The "Uncle Sam" poster includes humor and pride for one's country while Owen's poem does the opposite. This is seen at the end of the poem in the lines "The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est/Pro patria mori." (26-27) which means 'It is sweet and proper to die for one's country'.

Owen's poem brings us to question this. Is it 'sweet and proper to die for one's country'? What reasons are there to fight for one's country? Should one fight solely for the love of their country or should there be an honorable compensation for these soldiers? I think that soldiers should receive compensation for their amazing and courageous act of fighting in a war but should also not be forgotten after the war. The traumatic experiences mentioned in Owen's poem can affect a veteran mentally with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. The contrast of the poem and the image also brings up the fact that we should not be blinded by the masked reality of the war. We should understand the risks and danger of war and this should cause the country to want to lessen our exposure to war. It seems that more than ever, we forget that there are actual people, that have families and friends, fighting in the war. We no longer consider the death of a few an extreme tragedy. Why so?

Works Cited
Lubin, David M. "Losing Sight: War, Authority, And Blindness In British And American Visual Cultures, 1914-22." Art History 34.4 (2011): 796-817. Academic Search Alumni Edition. Web. 14 Jan. 2016.

Flagg, James Montgomery. I Want You for U.S. Army : Nearest Recruiting Station. 1917. Library Of Congress, Washington D.C. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. Http://www.loc.gov/. Web. 15 Jan. 2016. <http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/96507165/>.

Owen, Wilfred. "Dulce Et Decorum Est." Http://www.poetryfoundation.org/. Poems (Viking Press, 1921), n.d. Web. 15 Jan. 2016.

Gordon as He Entered Our Lines. Gordon under Medical Inspection. Gordon in His Uniform as a U.S. Soldier.

Made with PicMonkey

In Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince translated by William J. Connell there are two main ideas that constantly arise in the book.These ideas are virtue and fortune. Professor Van Den Abbeele described virtue in lecture as "... the quality of being a ... man or male in the gendered sense, as opposed to the generic human ..." and also described as"... valor, courage, character, strength, pride, attributes very different from the Christian idea of virtue as moral goodness". While he described fortune as "a gendered and misogynist stereotype" or "lady luck" he also brought up in lecture a line from The Prince describing fortune as "a lady" (199). The ideas are described as very polar; virtue is described as more masculine and fortune more feminine. This tells the readers to notice that there is a distinction between the two ideas, which further proves that one should not mistake fortune for virtue and vice versa. It seems that he represents fortune as masculine due to the fact that during his time masculinity was deemed positively. Also fortune is represented as a woman due to the fact that in many cases fortune is passed down by one's family which could be deemed as more of a motherly connection.

World War One British Soldiers. Digital image. Express.co.uk. Express, 23 Aug. 2014. Web. 2 Nov. 2015. <http://www.express.co.uk/news/world-war-1/502452/The-Battle-to-feed-Tommy-The-diet-of-a-WW1-soldier>.

Do people's actions revolve around War? In the play Mother Courage and Her Children Brecht depicts a world where everyone is motivated by war. This is linked to the Marxist ideal described by Professor Smith as "The Economic structure, the means of production of a society and age shapes other aspects (social forms,culture,system of justice individual consciousness etc.)" or put more simply by Smith "Economic Factors- who gets to own what in a society- help shape individual and social identities".¹ Mother Courage is motivated by war because her Wagon-run business depends on the soldiers fighting the war. If there is no war Mother Courage has no business. This is why in Act 8 Mother Courage says "Don't tell me peace has been broken out, I've just replenished my entire stock" (8.72). This shows that Mother Courage views peace negatively while many people would view peace positively. Mother Courage depends on the war for her financial success due to the fact that her business is dependent on the war. This is also evident in the quote that Professor Smith mentioned in lecture that Mother Courage exclaims “War! A great way to make a living!” (6.69). 

It is seen throughout the play that Mother Courage's values and even other character's values are morphed by the war. At the end of Act 12 Mother Courage sees her dead child Kattrin and then immediately decides to go "back to business" (12.103). Mother Courage's only child is killed but she decides that he business is more important.  Professor Smith also mentioned a quote where the Cook says “The war needs men, and men must eat” (85). The Cook's life is to serve the soldiers but this job is only given to him because of the war. His morals are affected by the war, he is a selfish person because of this war. His selfishness is seen in Act 9 when he inherits his aunt's inn and tells Mother Courage to come along but not Kattrin.(9.88) He tells Mother Courage " ...who'd want to look up from supper and see that [Kattrin] waiting to clear the table?..."(9.88). The Cook's morals are also affect by the war because he too cares only about his financial stability which comes from the war.

But what is Brecht trying to tell the audience? Brecht wants the audience to think logically about the play and not emotionally. Brecht does this by using the alienation effect to further cause the audience to have a disconnection with the characters. Mother Courage's and the Cook's choices in the play seem to be out of the norm which further distances the audience from sympathizing with these characters.  Brecht wants the audience to look at the play and realize that they have the power to change their societal and economic values.
______________________________________________________
1. This idea was discussed during lecture with Professor Smith.
Work Cited
Brecht, Bertolt, and Tony Kushner. Mother Courage. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Plc, 2009. Print.

The Humanities Core Writer's Handbook , "Analyzing Drama" brought up an interesting exercise (exercise one) that I took inspiration from for my blog post today (64). This week in Humanities Core we were assigned to read the play Mother Courage and Her Children by Bertolt Brecht. Mother Courage ,otherwise known as Anna Fierling, is a mother of three just trying to sell her goods from a wagon while the Thirty Years War is occurring. Mother Courage prides her self on her cunning bargaining skills and her need for financial stability.  In Act 1 the Sergeant asks " ... Why's she called 'Courage'?"(1.8). His comment asks us to think why she is called "Courage" throughout the whole play and question "Is Mother Courage really courageous?"

First we must identify what makes someone courageous and if we see these qualities in Mother Courage or does she fail to even express these qualities? Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, Winston Church Hill and Rosa Parks are just a few people that we view as courageous. They all have one thing in common; these people are not selfish. Their cause for courage is out of the goodness of their hearts and to help the people. But does Mother Courage do the same? Is she selfless or selfish?

Although Mother Courage wears the name of bravery she seems to be doing the opposite in Act 3 of the play. In the act when her son is taken captive for ransom, she even bargains the money for his release (3.43-50). Mother Courage does not seem to be a brave person in this case, she seems to be more hesitant and more selfish. She is a coward, at a time of need her first instinct is to bargain with the criminals. Although some may argue that Mother Courage was trying to protect her self and the rest of her family from financial ruin; most parents in this situation no matter how much the money would give everything they had without any hesitation. As Professor Smith noted, this also shows how Brecht tries to disconnect the reader from the characters emotionally.¹ Brecht depicts Mother Courage as a heartless human being. Any parent who loves there child would give up an arm and a leg to keep their child safe. Mother Courage is a selfish human being that only cares about her financial stability. As Thomas Hobbes idea of humanity states that "human beings are, at their core, selfish creatures". People who share Hobbes' views would argue that Mother Courage is not brave but that she is selfish and only wants to protect herself.
_____________________________________________________________________________1. This idea was discussed during lecture with Professor Smith.

Work Cited:
Castillo, Larisa. Humanities Core Writer's Hand Book. United States: Pearson. 2014. Print

Guardian Composite. Digital image. Theguardian.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Nov. 2014. <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/19/new-cold-war-back-to-bad-old-days-russia-west-putin-ukraine>.

Is the new cold war arising? Many have reason to believe that this is true. What makes this cold war differ from the former cold war lasting from 1947-1991 is that currently this war is due to "Russian opposition to NATO expansion" .  In a recent Commentary Magazine article titled "It’s Not a New Cold War, It’s Worse", Noah Rothman speaks about this debatable topic. Rothman believes that this conflict is much bigger than just a cold war. He argues that since "The Russian public is restless and dissatisfied, an extraordinarily malleable American president will soon leave office, and financial pressures have compelled the Kremlin to scale back its already unsustainable military expenditures" this will lead to a drastically different result than a cold war. Many side with Rothman in this belief, Rand Paul even believes that theses efforts could lead to World War III.

While Marco Rubio believes that we are "barreling toward a second Cold War". Rubio declares that the United States has a responsibility to take control of the situation at hand. I personally believe that it is too soon to judge how this conflict will play out. There have been many events that have happened this past week that have inched us closer to a cold war like the bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan by the United States and rocket missiles shot by Russia towards an Islamic State group but only time can tell.

Work Cited:
Are We On The Brink Of A New Cold War? Perf. Trace Domingues. TestTube News, n.d. Web. 28 June 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrSBVI1Vshc>.
Rothman, Noah. "It’s Not a New Cold War, It’s Worse." <i>Commentary Magazine</i>. N.p., 5 Oct. 2015. Web. 7 Oct. 2015.
Mindock, Clark. "Russia Airstrikes In Syria: Russian Sanctions, Lethal Aid For Ukraine Promised If Rubio Becomes President." International Business Times. N.p., 2 Oct. 2015. Web. 7 Oct. 2015. 
CNN Wire. "Is U.S. Bombing of Afghan Hospital a War Crime?" FOX40. N.p., 7 Oct. 2015. Web. 7 Oct. 2015.
"Russian Missiles 'hit IS in Syria from Caspian Sea'" BBC News. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Oct. 2015.
David Weigel. "Rand Paul: No-fly Zone in Syria ‘could Lead to World War III’." The Washington Post. N.p., 7 Oct. 2015. Web. 7 Oct. 2015.

N.d. Misha's Musings. Web. 2 Oct. 2015. <https://nemisha8.wordpress.com/2014/06/22/science-vs-humanities/>.

Humanities core is an exciting and interesting class that I believe will make me a better writer and reader of novels and poetry. What I wish to get out of humanities core is a better understanding of literature. I hope to not only use what I have learned in the past to improve my writing but to use what I will learn in this class to become an even better writer. I plan to use the skills I learn in Humanities core not only now but in the future during my career. I do not wish to limit my education in this class to strictly writing essays and other forms of written expression like this blog but I plan to become more skilled at understanding the texts I read . I wish to acquire skills like "interpretation" (Pan, P.8-7)  and analysis to further understand the texts I read in the this class.