NEW YORK -- Bud Light said it with beer cans and Martha
Stewart with red velvet cake as companies and celebrities from Beyonce to George
Takei joined millions of social media users in posting and tweaking a simple red
logo in support of gay marriage.
A square box with thick pink horizontal lines (the mathematical equal symbol)
was offered for sharing this week by the Human Rights Campaign as the U.S.
Supreme Court took up arguments in key marriage rights cases.
The image, replacing profile pictures on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
Tumblr, Pinterest and elsewhere, is a makeover of the advocacy group's logo, usually a blue background with bright yellow lines. The HRC made
it available in red -- for the color of love -- on Monday and estimated tens of
millions of shares by Wednesday.
"It shows the enthusiasm and the passion," said Fred Sainz, a spokesman for
the nonprofit in Washington, D.C.
Like viral campaigns of yore, supporting breast cancer awareness (pink),
President Barack Obama (change your middle name to Hussein) and even Arab Spring
(green), a bit of fatigue set in on some social media streams by those
questioning whether such efforts serve to change any minds or, put simply, are
plain annoying.
From Day One of the Supreme Court's hearings on Same Sex Marriage, some of the key questions to consider came from the "man in the middle" -- Justice Anthony Kennedy.
1. “I just wonder if the case was properly granted.” —Justice Anthony Kennedy
Kennedy twice asked whether the most prudent course would be, in effect, to punt.
Why might the justices conclude that they goofed in accepting the Prop. 8 case for review? Well, for one thing, the state of California itself has filed a brief supporting the challengers to its own law. The appeal is being pushed by a coalition of Californians who support Prop. 8 and have stepped into the state’s shoes to defend the provision. The Supreme Court may decide that these foes of gay marriage lack “standing,” as they have suffered no distinct harm and are not accountable to the state or its residents at large. If the Supremes decided this way, same sex marriage would still stand in California, but not make a sweeping Equal Justice Under the Law ruling.
2. “The voice of those children is important in this case, don’t you think?” —Justice Kennedy
The inquisitive Kennedy referred to the children of same-sex couples in California. He strongly suggested that, unlike the defenders of Prop. 8 and traditional conceptions of marriage, these kids do suffer “immediate legal injury” when their two moms or two dads are not allowed to wed officially. “They want their parents to have full recognition and full status,” Kennedy said, implying that the children in question have promising futures themselves as constitutional litigators.
If Kennedy and four colleagues were swayed by the voice of the children, they could announce a constitutional right to gay marriage nationwide. They could also choose a middle ground: a narrower ruling that created a right to gay marriage in California and perhaps some other states.
3. (From Day Two on DOMA) "Which in our society means that the federal government is intertwined with the citizens' day-to-day life, you are at real risk of running in conflict with what has always been thought to be the essence of the state police power, which is to regulate marriage, divorce, custody," -- Justice Kennedy
(From CNN.com)
The second session on same sex marriage and it constitutionality dealt with the Defense of Marriage Act, passed by Congress in 1996. It said, in part, that legally married same-sex couples cannot enjoy the range of financial and other benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples.
A Supreme Court justice is sometimes like a fussy 8-year-old. She must eat her peas before any dessert. The dessert, of course, in the same sex-marriage cases are the constitutional "equal protection questions" -- the ones that get to the heart of defining what marriage is all about, the ones the entire nation wants answered.
But Wednesday's green vegetables are the gateway or the jurisdictional barriers that must first be confronted. The justices spent the first 50 minutes of their two-hour argument deciding whether they should even be there. Can House Republicans defend the Defense of Marriage Act when the president refuses to do so?
It's no small matter. The executive branch, by tradition and statute, is charged with defending acts of Congress. The Obama Justice Department was doing just that when DOMA was being adjudicated by a federal judge in New York. Then an abrupt about-face. So one house of Congress decided it had to step in.
"Let's not confuse the issue of DOMA and the administration's decision that it was unconstitutional," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told CNN last week. "It is not their role to decide what's constitutional. DOMA was a law that was passed by the House and Senate and signed into law by President Clinton.
"In our system of government, the administration doesn't get to decide what's constitutional -- the Supreme Court does. ... Our financing the lawsuit was to make sure the proper forum was used to make sure that we know what's constitutional and what isn't."
Did you see 60 Minutes on Sunday? A good refesher on Russian dissent.
From 60 Minutes Overtime:
For Lesley Stahl, reporting on the Russian punk band "Pussy Riot," meant
meeting the band on their turf and speaking their language -- and we don't mean
Russian. Here's one question Lesley asked the drummer during their 60 Minutes
interview. "I'm going to take a quote from your song because it sounds pretty
outrageous. '(*#!&!), (*#!&!), the (*#!&!), is (*#!&!).'"
To hear why Stahl and two 60 Minutes producers went all the way to Moscow to
interview an amateurish girl band with a dirty name, watch the below linked Overtime
video. (Note to viewers: The voice of the band's drummer has been altered by the
broadcast for her safety.)
60 Minutes overtime: Why the P* Riot story is so important
COMMENT:
What do you think of Pussy Riot?
________________________
By the Way, also this past weekend in news relating to Putin's Russia:
Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky died over the weekend in London. The oligarch made a fortune when the Soviet Union broke up but after disagreements with Russia's president, he sought and received asylum in Britain in 2003. In Britain, there's intense speculation over whether the Kremlin wanted him dead.
For Class on Monday: Make sure you have reviewed, Intro to Mexico power point (on Google Docs page), and read first section of Hauss and "Mexico Makes It" article and write position paper on the prompt, "Is Mexico a Failed State?"
For Tuesday: Extra Credit Book Chats will be led with our readers of "Putin's Russia" and "Red China Blues." Below are disucssion questions:
Discussion questions for Putin's Russia
1) Big terrorist attacks have in the past been used by the Kremlin to justify tightening its grip on power and curbing the opposition. The second war in Chechnya, in 2000, which helped to propel Mr Putin into his presidency, was accompanied by a move to bring Russian television under Kremlin control. In 2004, after the school siege in Beslan, in North Ossetia, Mr Putin scrapped regional elections. Using examples from the reading, what would the author predict for Russia's new north Caucasus policy? Why would this be a mistake according to the author? Do you agree?
2) Putin's more autocratic state is supposed to be a more effective state. The author emphatically answers that fear is the only public good that Putin's Kremlin provided effectively. Explain.
3) The author devotes considerable space showing how Putin's government did little to provide most basic state services. She argues hotly that the Russian Armed Services, rather than protecting civilians from terrorism or violent crime, have themselves become perpetrators of state terrorism. How?
4) Effective States have independent courts capable of enforcing the Rule of Law. Institutionally, does Politkovskaya see Rule of Law in Putin's Russia?
5) According the the author, Russian Courts served the interests of criminals and oligarchs. From our unit of study, did that seem to be reformed in Putin's Modern Russia?
6) By the author's account, Putin does not care about the people. She criticizes the political and economic system he has consolidated with true stories and reporting that probably cost her her life. But every day an Army private is hazed to death, a middle class family in Moscow drives to Ikea to purchase furniture for their newly renovated Dacha. Russian GDP grew steadily for 6 years under Putin, and the number of people below the poverty line dropped significantly. In your opinion, do the ends justify the means in Putin's Russia?
7) JusticeforNorthCaucasus.com wrote in 2001, "That Politkovskaya herself has withstood poisoning and harassment to tell the truth about Putin's Russia should give even the most pessimistic observer of Russian affairs hope." But in 2006, the author was murdered and the president called her, "a person of no significance." What does this say about the hope for modern Russia becoming a liberal democracy?
8) Some have claimed Politkovskaya's critique of Putin's Russia is over the top. One on-line reviewer called her, "Russia's Michael Moore." Do you find this analysis objective and legitimate, or illegitimate opposition propaganda?
1. Jan Wong tells us that all existing dictionaries and language textbooks were destroyed at the time of the Cultural Revolution. Why was this necessary? How effectively could a political system be shaped or controlled by such a measure?
2. When the author realises, early on, that she is not allowed the freedom to think, she says this is “only the beginning of my real awakening, a painful process that would take several years more.” Why was her awakening such a slow process?
3. If the author had grown up in China, do you think her doubts and questions would not have arisen in her student years? Or do you think her classmates went through similar “awakenings”?
4. In theory at least, the workers had better living conditions than intellectuals in China in the early 1970s. Does this strike you as any more unfair than the opposite situation?
5. Having completed the book, what are your feelings about Jan Wong’s informing on Yin (the girl who wanted help getting to the West) while she was still an unquestioning Maoist?
6. Could you characterize the four sections of the book? Do they differ in tone as well as content?
7. Broadly speaking, the first half of the book avoids overviews or hindsight, but in the second half the author adopts a more knowing perspective. What effect does this have for the reader?
8. What fresh insights have you obtained from Jan Wong’s analysis of the Tiananmen Square demonstration and the detailed description of the subsequent massacre?
9. The author says that the Tiananmen massacre could have been avoided: “An experienced mediator could have solved things so easily.” How different do you think life in China might have been after the demonstration if there had been no violence?
10. At the beginning of the book the author is writing largely about herself and her reactions to the political system. The last part of the book is more concerned with the stories of individuals living in post-Tiananmen Square China. What can you deduce from this? How much do you think she has changed, and how much has China changed?
_______________
For your 10 points of EC, make sure you complete the discussion questions and then lead small group discussion break-outs as you "drop knowledge,'' on your fellow students.
Tuesday, 115 cardinals from 69 countries began the Papal Conclave -- or Papal Election -- at the Vatican. Black smoke emerged from the chimney at the Sistine Chapel, signaling that no pope from the secret voting.
John Paul II changed the rules of the Conclave so a Pope could be elected by
simple majority.
But Benedict XVI changed the requirements back so that a two-thirds majority
is required, meaning the man elected is likely to be a compromise candidate.
Before the voting begins in the Sistine Chapel, the entire area is checked by
security experts to ensure there are no hidden microphones or cameras.
Each voter (the Cardinals under the age of 80) vote for a single person. If a person obtains at least 2/3 of the vote, he is elected. If this is not the case, a new election is organized until a person reaches the threshold (4 votes may be held Wednesday). These successive elections are perfectly identical. In the absence of a 2/3 majority, it is thus necessary for some cardinals change their vote (in order from someone to be elected). It is worth noting that there are no official candidates and the cardinals may vote for whoever they want.
Here's a breakdown and protocol of a hypothetical papal vote:
Example -- There are 5 voters and 3 candidates (A,B and C). The distribution of the votes of the first election is as follows:
Voter 1 -- A
Voter 2 -- A
Voter 3 -- B
Voter 4 -- B
Voter 5 -- C
Candidates A and B obtain 2 votes each, while candidate C obtains 1 vote. No candidate gets 2/3 of the votes, so a second election is then organized with the same three candidates. The distribution of the second vote is as follows:
Voter 1 -- A
Voter 2 -- A
Voter 3 -- A
Voter 4 -- A
Voter 5 -- C
Voters 3 and 4 changed their vote in favor of candidate A. He now receives 4/5s of the vote, more than the 2/3 needed and he becomes the next pope.White smoke emerges from the Sistine Chapel, with the breaking news that a new pope has been elected.
Remember, the USA is NOT an AP6 Comparative Country. That being said, a couple of interesting comparisons I found over the last two days might help you as we approach our exam on China and Russia next week.
(From APGov.org)
Countries by geographic area:
#1 Russia
#2 Antarctica
#3 Canada
#4 USA
#5 China
#6 Australia
#14 Mexico
#19 Iran
#32 Nigeria
#80 UK
_________________
Former Republican presidential candidate, governor of Utah, and U.S. Ambassador to China, Jon Huntsman, sat down for a wide-ranging conversation on the state of politics in the United States—and the future of U.S.-China relations. From the event, I retweeted this:@JonHuntsman:"It's hard to find an analogous level of expertise about China inside the US. Their bureaucracy is better prepped." A couple of thoughts here. It is true the only party state can and has been more efficient in major capitial projects, but China is stuggling to reform its bureaucracy. There are roughly 300 million government employees in China.In recent years the central government has vowed to shrink the bloated bureaucracy. They have laid off some people and reduced salaries yet many people continues draw substantial salaries at the taxpayers expense.
John Lee wrote in Newsweek, “While modern China is the most overgoverned land in Asia, it is also one of the worst governed. Even as China has decentralized and officials have multiplied, the country is not building the institutions needed for better transparency and accountability. CCP’s influence over courts, bureaucracies, media, research institutions, and state-controlled enterprises are well known. It’s difficult to make CCP’s local officials accountable when Beijing relies on them to maintain the party’s hold on power in far-flung places.
"Chop" pictured at below, instead of a signature, is stamped on government policies.
The powerful State Council is China’s highest administrative body. It makes proposals to the Standing Committee of the Politburo and takes care of the day-to-day operations of the country. It is a huge bureaucracy controlled by the Communist Party and headed by the Prime Minister.
The bureaucracy is led by the party elite. Participation is limited to members of the Communist Party. The Central Party School is the top training ground for Communist Party bureaucrats. All the top leaders attended it.
A great deal of time is taken up by sitting through lengthy meetings which accomplish little and sifting through lengthy documents and paperwork that are largely waste time. In 2007, the State Council set limits on the lengths of official meetings, speeches and documents. The bureaucracy is slowly reforming and becoming more accountable. A health minister was fired for mistakes made during the SARS crisis in 2003. This was seen as a sign that leading bureaucrats were going to be held accountable for their actions
The traditional Communist bureaucracy operates under a command system of specified ranks called nomenklatura in which everyone knew his place, his role, and what he was supposed to do, think and say. Bureaucrats have traditionally been resistant to changes because in many cases change would make them obsolete and unnecessary. Common terms used to describe Communist members included appartchik, a petty bureaucrat;cadre, a group or a member of a group of Communist loyalists; and commissar, a personnel officer responsible for morale and discipline.
Recently, “Reform programs have brought the devolution of considerable decision-making authority to the provincial and lower levels. Nevertheless, because of the continued predominance of the fundamental principle of democratic centralism, which is at the base of China's State Constitution, these lower levels are always vulnerable to changes in direction and decisions originated at the central level of government. In this respect, all local organs are essentially extensions of central government authorities and thus are responsible to the "unified leadership" of the central organs.
Where buisness is linked to government in both the US and in China it is also important to understand the Chinese element of Guanxi.“Guanxi” literally means "relationships", stands for any type of relationship. In the Chinese business world, however, it is also understood as the network of relationships among various parties that cooperate together and support one another. The Chinese businessmen mentality is very much one of "You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours." In essence, this boils down to exchanging favors, which are expected to be done regularly and voluntarily. Therefore, it is an important concept to understand if one is to function effectively in Chinese society.
Guanxi explains one reason why for years Coca-Cola has had a big edge in the Chinese market over Pepsi. Coke used guanxi to franchise local distributors, while Pepsi perfered direct ownership hiring local managers.
________________
(From Teaching Comparative blog)
Back in 1992, supreme leader Deng Xiaoping said, "The country should allow some
regions and people to get rich first and then gradually push for common
prosperity." Well, the first part of that is happening.
The
legislature of the world’s last major communist country is almost certainly the
wealthiest in the world, according to a popular rich list that names 83 dollar
billionaires among the delegates to China’s parliament this year.
Meanwhile, in the United States, there is not a single billionaire in
the House of Representatives or the Senate…
Given the difficulties
involved in calculating the hidden wealth of many of China’s top leaders and
their families, analysts say the Hurun report probably seriously understates the
true number of super-wealthy participants in the political sessions…
A Short Answer Concept FRQ question like this could be seen on the AP Test:
1. Describe a major social cleavage in China. Discuss two policies the Chinese state has adopted since 1990 in response to that cleavage.
Instead of a Ch. 10 Hauss China Quiz, your quiz will be to answer the short answer concept question above and the two "Flipped" lesson questions below.
Watch the videos about Wukan. (From APGov.org) Wukan is a city in the South of China (near Hong Kong) that featured a significant protest and unprecedented response by the CCP.
2. Which of the following is TRUE about the Protests of Wukan?
A.Wukan's protest ended similarly to the protest in Tiananmen Square in 1989.
B.The CCP refused to listen to the Wukan protestors and the leaders of the protest are now "enemies of the state." C.The protest stemmed from corrupt behavior of CCP officials in Wukan. D.The protest did not last long enough to force the CCP to respond to the protestors' demands. E.The protest was an anomoly; there are very few protests against the CCP or the Chinese Government.
3.. Explain how the events in Wukan connect the CompGov concept of Democratization.
_________________
Consider any of the following as China social cleavages (Question 1):
A Dog's Life in China -- 15 remarkable photographs of country dogs and city dogs, strays and pets, ladies and tramps.
(From Teaching Comparative blog)
Textbook authors are keen to impress on readers that the kind of ethnic
cleavages seen in places like Nigeria and Russia are mostly absent in China.
That oversimplification glosses over Xinjiang, Tibet, and the massive programs
to encourage Han Chinese to move to provinces near the border.
Keep in mind that Xinjiang is one of those places (geographic cleavage) where
ethnic Uighurs (ethnic cleavage) who used to dominate the population are
practicing Muslims (religious cleavage). Note that all those cleavages coincide,
and you know what that means. Add to that the political tradition represented by
the Chinese maxim, "Heaven is high and the Emperor is far away."
Xinjiang, the vast region in whose west lies the old Silk Road city
of Kashgar, has a history of tension between the ethnic-Turkic, mostly Muslim,
Uighurs who used to make up most of its population, and the authorities,
dominated by ethnic-Han Chinese. During Ramadan, which comes to an end on August
19th, that tension has been exacerbated by the government’s intervention in
religious practice.
It has been discouraging, and in some places even
banning, Communist Party cadres, government officials, students and
schoolchildren from fasting and attending mosques during working hours…
Groups representing Uighur exiles say that this year the campaign has
been more intense than usual. Xinjiang’s government has denied forcing people to
break the fast. Hou Hanmin, a spokeswoman, was quoted by Global Times, a
party-owned newspaper, saying that the government did, however, “encourage
residents to eat properly for study and work purposes.”
This is resented
by many Uighurs as yet another encroachment on their traditions. Kashgar is
rapidly becoming a Chinese city like many others… In Xinjiang as a whole,
Uighurs and other minorities are now outnumbered by Han Chinese.
The two Chechen wars and continuing Chechen crisis which erupts with insurgent attacks heads up the list of cleavages in the Russian Federation, as it underscores nationality and religious divides in Putin's Russia. Be able to indentify the North Caucasus (these are different than near-abroad independent states like Georgia that Russia still likes to claim influence on.
Ethel Wood (one of two Study Guide authors I recomend) highlights the separations in Russian Society and Politics here. I have updated in (---).
NATIONALITY - The most important single cleavage in the Russian
Federation is nationality. Although almost 82% are Russians, the country
included sizeable numbers of Tatars, Ukrainians, Chuvashes, Bashkis,
Byelorussians, and Modavians. These cleavages determine the organization of the
country into a "federation," with "autonomous regions," republics, and provinces
whose borders are based on ethnicity. Like the breakaway republics of 1991, many
would like to have their independence, although most have trade benefits from
the Russian government that induce them to stay within the Federation. A notable
exception is Chechnya, a primarily Muslim region that has fought for several
years for their freedom. The Russian government has had considerable difficulty
keeping Chechnya a part of Russia, and the independence movement there is still
very strong. Almost certainly, other regions are watching, and the government
knows that if Chechnya is successful, other independence movements may break out
in the country.
RELIGION - Tsarist Russia was overwhelmingly Russian Orthodox, with
the tsar serving as spiritual head of the church. In reaction, the Soviet Union
prohibited religious practices of all kinds, so that most citizens lost their
religious affiliations during the twentieth century. Boris Yeltsin encouraged
the Russian Orthodox Church to reestablish itself, partly as a signal of his
break with communism, but also as a reflection of old Russian nationalism. Today
most citizens are still nonreligious, with only about 16% claiming affiliation
with the Russian Orthodox Church. Other religious are represented by tiny
percentages &endash; Roman Catholic, Jews, Muslim and Protestant. Since the
current regime is so new and political parties so uncertain, no clear pattern
has emerged that indicate political attitudes of religious v. nonreligious
citizens. (That could be beginning to change. During the Soviet-era the State eliminated the Church. Now the Church is Friend with the State, so since there never was a legal separation of Church and State, today's growing fusion between Church and State has led to a concern by some...see Orthodox
Corruption? A film by Simon Ostrovsky and Veronika Dorman )
SOCIAL CLASS - The Soviet attempts to destroy social class differences
in Russia were at least partially successful. The old noble/peasant distinction
of Tsarist Russia was abolished, but was replaced by another cleavage: members
of the Communist Party and nonmembers. Only about 7% of the citizenry were party
members, but all political leaders were recruited from this group. Economic
favors were granted to party members as well, particularly those of the Central
Committee and the Politburo. However, egalitarian views were promoted, and the
nomenklatura process of recruiting leaders from lower levels of the party was
generally blind to economic and social background. Today Russian citizens appear
to be more egalitarian in their political and social views than people of the
established democracies.
Many observers of modern Russia note that a new socio-economic class may be
developing within the context of the budding market economy: entrepreneurs that
have recently amassed fortunes from new business opportunities. However, the
fortunes of many of these newly rich Russians were wiped away by the 1997
business bust, so it is difficult to know how permanent this class may be. Boris
Yeltsin's government contributed to this class by distributing huge favors to
them, and many believe that a small but powerful group of entrepreneurs
sponsored the presidential campaign of Vladimir Putin in 2000.
Pictured above The Economist reports on the drink-as-you-go pension policy leading to a young vs old conflict.
RURAL VS. URBAN - Industrialization since the era of Joseph Stalin has
led to an increasingly urban population, with about 77% of all Russians now
living in cities, primarily in the western part of the country. The economic
divide between rural and urban people is wide, although recent economic woes
have beset almost all Russians no matter where they live. City dwellers are more
likely to be well-educated and in touch with western culture, but the political
consequences of these differences are unclear in the unsettled current political
climate.
(Ironically, in the Tandem "Bro-Mance" rule of Putin and Medvedev, the PM has been "messaging" the rural interests.)
Vast cities are being built across China at a rate of ten a year, but they remain
almost uninhabited
ghost cities. It's estimated there are 64 million empty
apartments.
6o Minutes Reported on the Real Estate Bubble Sunday.
It happens rarely. But every once in a while, during a 60 Minutes interview,
someone will drop a bomb into the conversation and say something that shocks
even our veteran correspondents. That happened to Lesley Stahl in this week's
interview with a Chinese billionaire named
Zhang Xin.
Waubonsie Valley student citizens will have an opportunity to help put information about the District 204 school board candidates on social media (and qualify for extra credit in government) by attending Monday night's first of three candidate forums, at WVHS.
(From Dist. 204 press release)
Community members have the opportunity to learn about the candidates running in the upcoming school board election by attending one of the following forums:
March 4, 7 to 9 pm
Waubonsie Valley High School, 2590 Ogden Ave., Aurora
Hosted by Indian Prairie Education Association and Indian Prairie Classified Association - See more
Five seats on the seven member board of education will be filled at the April 9 election. Four candidates will serve four-year terms expiring in April 2017, and one candidate will serve a two-year term expiring April 2015.
The following candidates will be on the ballot to fill the four-year terms:
Cathy Piehl
Vasavi Chakka
Krishna Bansal
Michael Raczak
Sotiria Kapsis
Maria Curry
Jazmin Santillan
Benjamin White
The following candidate will be on the ballot to fill the two-year term:
Justin Karubas
______________
District 204 social studies teachers will be offering an opportunity to attend and connect to other student citizens by following the forum live and through social media on Twitter:
I am encouraging students to attend and tweet some insights from the forum for credit:
When they tweet, they must also type: #ipsdforum
FOR EXAMPLE: "Can you
believe what she just mentioned about education? #ipsdforum" Then that
tweet will be visible for all to see who click #ipsdforum. This will be our own
personal room for this event and it will allow us to see every tweet the
students send as long as they put in the aforementioned hashtag.
