Unit 1 Revision:
On the Unit 1 revision, I basically used the comments given by you on what I need to fix and improve on. I removed the whole rant about regents towards the end and fixed a bit of error in the beginning as well. I’ve added a few more details as to when I was NOT cared about and such. I included some type of detail in regards to online friends and their influence.
Unit 1:
It’s not a surprise that the American education system is completely disconnected from its student and reformation is needed. Lessening the stress applied to the students and making them feel more comfortable with being there would drastically reform this. Growing up as an introverted kid, I always resorted to having a life online and having a majority of my friends there, at the time. Being exposed to social media and having the capability to view almost anything, I was overwhelmingly exposed to opinions about resenting the education system and how poor it is. Mockery of teachers, the logic behind stories on the SATs, etc. Being so exposed to these opinionated ideas, it made me also conform to these opinions. I started to care less about school because I completely agreed with how everyone else online thought. The only way I broke free from this conformity is by having a personal connection with a teacher I had that made me move forward and made me feel like someone actually cared about me in school. Most of my friends being online just worsened it as I conformed to how they felt, rather than focus on how I feel towards education myself.
My resentment towards school made me completely give up on even going and focusing on my future. I felt as if school never mattered and I didn’t need school to go far in life, but I was completely wrong. Of course, I had external factors, like my parents, that cared about me going and made me want to focus on my education, but I kept rebelling. I lacked the motivation I needed to move forward and my mentality was that if no one cared, why should I? Sometimes I’d even try my hardest and if it wasn’t good enough, I’d be belittled by my parents at times and told to try harder and do better. I constantly look back to how I was in high school and compare it to how I am currently and realize I was stressing myself out for nothing. I always thought high school would be extremely hard and I applied all that stress towards myself with never showing up or bothering to do any work. It’s definitely self-inflicted but I felt as if I was given up on. Due to me rebellious nature, slowly my parents gave up on me and didn’t know when I get back to my senses. I stressed myself about my grades and how was I going to graduate, but again, it was all self-inflicted. As much as I wanted to pull a one-eighty and put myself on the right path, I kept failing to, as I said before, I lacked the motivation I needed to push on. I always dreamed about going to John Jay and entering the NYPD, but decimating my GPA by my actions during freshman year of high school, I knew that dream was long gone. I never agreed with the testing, either. Surely the point of testing is to test your intelligence but I could be more educated in one area rather than another and failing would make me feel insulted and stupid. I know my intelligence isn’t low and testing would make me freeze up completely.
I pushed myself towards heading to college and graduating with the class of 2019 by having a personal connection with a teacher that made me want to succeed. My previous global history teacher, Ms. Aluzzo, made me happy to show up to class and learn the material. The way she taught the material also made me intrigued to hear more about it. I never found any of her work boring nor did it make me want to not show up. Her, alone, set me on the right path as she knew my struggle with my absences in other classes and my lack of care for school. Aluzzo motivated me to move forward and not give up so easily. The care she provided for me was enough to make me want to go to college and actually become somebody. Before having a class with her, I’ve met her once by being kicked out of my freshman class and into her sophomore class due to bad behavior. After making her laugh and basically establishing some sort of relationship with her, it made me excited to have her as a teacher for my years to come, but around that time I still didn’t care about school. The whole social studies department of teachers always made me feel comfortable and cared for as history and politics have always been my forte. I’d say I had my turn around during my junior year of high school where I met even more history teachers that made me excited to show up and learn the material. As much as I hated the topic in my other classes, it didn’t matter to me. My history classes were enough to make me want to push through the school day. Having a friendly relationship with just one teacher was enough to make me want to push forward, but having multiple for my school years to come made it so much more tolerable. I finally realized the error of my ways and actually started to show up and finalize my education. My opinion of resenting school and most material taught hasn’t changed, and it still hasn’t. However, I don’t mind actually going and learning and doing what I have to do. Going to college gives me more of a choice of what I want to do rather than being forced on doing what I have to do and having that freedom makes me tolerate college extremely more.
The way I acted in high school I wouldn’t even dare to attempt in college as it’s actually not free anymore. Amaya, a classmate of mine in my law class and English class, once showed up sick. The professor gave her recommendation of staying home but Amaya’s mother justified her going to college by saying, “it ain’t free no more so you’re gonna go.” The environment of college and my classes are way more inviting in comparison to my high school. The environment justified my resentment formed by social media. Fake people, careless teachers, and so on. Some tests I’d take in my high school were given by instructors didn’t care enoguh where other students were openly cheating off of other people by copying their work and even the instructor didn’t care and even said to not make it obvious! Now look, I ain’t gonna lie to you, I did the same exact thing and cheated off of somebody else and even formed a little group to talk about questions, but it’s ridiculous that tests was taken not serious whatsoever when teachers would make it seem like it’s the hardest test ever.
Unit 2 Revision:
On the Unit 2 Revision, I didn’t actually change much but some very little details and such. I mainly dabbled within my first source rather than any other as I had the most trouble with my first source. I hope that would clear the air a bit. I explained more about the FEC and its mission.
Unit 2:
My Research Question: How do we Introduce a Third Party to American Politics?
American politics is dominated by a two-party system which is beginning to lose popularity, maybe it’s about time we introduce a third party? Republicans and the Democrats have always had a long-lasting feud and sometimes rarely being bipartisan on policies. Americans need a third party to get behind when they disagree with both parties and have comfort in running to one that would have a significant voice in the government.
Source 1: The Federal Election Commission: Qualifying as a Political Party
To qualify as a political party, it all comes down to how the state governs ballot access. According to the Federal Election Commission, it all differs from federal and state representation as you have to gain political party status after meeting state criteria. “While the laws differ from state to state, they generally all require a nonmajor party to demonstrate sufficient voter support—such as by filing a petition for party recognition signed by a representative number of voters—in order to qualify for ballot access in the general election.” Claiming you’re a political party without a sufficient amount of supporters is inaccurate and improper. The Federal Election Commission is an independent government agency whose purpose is to enforce campaign finance law in United States federal elections. The FEC was created during 1975 by Congress and it has jurisdiction over the United States. The current commissioner for the FEC is Ellen L. Weintraub whose affiliation is with the Democratic Party. However, the chair for the FEC is pretty divided as some seated members are Independent or even Republican.
The FEC is pretty important and cannot be affiliated with any party within the government and its main mission to primarily investigate finance abuse by setting limits. The FEC was created by the United States Congress in April of 1975 primarily to disclose campaign finance information, to enforce the provisions of the law such as the limits and prohibitions on contributions, and to oversee the public funding of presidential elections. You’re required to register your political party with the FEC, “when they raise or spend money over certain thresholds in connection with a federal election.” The FEC tells me what’s required for an organization to even claim political party status within a state and the criteria they specifically have to meet. This sets standards and boundaries so gaining status wouldn’t be abused or thrown away. If a committee can demonstrate they’re capable of gaining national status, the FEC will decide if they gained enough activity to even gain status. If a state wants to only participate in states and/or local elections, they’re not legally bound to register with the FEC, however, state laws will still determine if they meet the criteria to even show up on the ballot as a choice. Not showing up on a ballot will prevent any recognition or voters, a third party would get.
Source 2: Wikipedia’s list of Third Parties
Third parties already exist within the United States, but they’re so poorly represented and can’t even rack up electoral votes. Wikipedia can provide information on every third party that’s currently active, inactive, or even state-only parties that only stick with state and/or elections, like the “Rent is Too Damn High Party” which is based in New York City and wouldn’t qualify for federal elections. Wikipedia provides up-to-date information on specific topics and maintains a neutral standpoint as its purpose is to provide facts, not biassed opinions. Biographies, descriptions, questions answered, etc. Wikipedia is owned by Wikimedia Foundation, which was founded by Jimmy Wales, an internet entrepreneur, and Larry Sanger, an online community organizer and philosophy professor, in 2001. Jimmy Wales is pretty left-leaning as he signed an open letter to American voters, along with eleven business leaders, to not vote for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. Larry Sanger’s party affiliation is unknown, however, Wikipedia is also run by volunteer contributors that assist in correcting information on pages.
Some may refute Wikipedia as a valid source and say some information is made up, but not just anyone can change the information on a page, it has to be verified. Wikipedia’s mission is to spread knowledge and help people with educating. The list provided by Wikipedia to show the number of third parties in the United States and what they are do not include independents as they’re just centrists with either left or right-leaning. The source also provides the presidential votes they acquired in the 2016 election along with any state legislators that won an election. The only parties that have a significant amount of registrations, which are people who registered their support for their respective parties, are the Libertarian, Green, and Constitution Party. The Libertarian Party exceeds 500,000 registered voters, the Green party has around 250,000 registered voters, and the Constitution Party has nearly 100,000 registered voters, these three parties are the only third parties that have the highest amount of registered voters.
Source 3: Poll conducted by Reinhart of Gallup News
We need a third major political party and Americans to want one. The two major parties currently dominating American politics consist of the Republicans and the Democrats. Gallup News, a pretty fair unbiased news organization, provided a poll displaying the support for a major third political party amongst Americans. “A majority of Americans, 57%, say there is a need for a third, major political party, while 38% of Americans believe the current two-party system does an adequate job of representing the people. These views have been consistent since 2013.” The percentage has been significantly higher than 50% for the past years the poll has been conducted throughout. Gallup began conducting this poll around 2003 which was reversed and the public supported the idea that the two-party system is sufficient enough for American politics. RJ Reinhart, the person who wrote the article and conducted the poll, is an analyst, writer, and editor for Gallup and Gallup’s Higher Education and Government Divisions. Reinhart is in opposition with Trump, in regards to his tweets/retweets of key critics of Trump. Reinhart is biased with his politics, which lean left, however, this doesn’t affect the integrity of the poll.
A want for a third party isn’t determined by your political party affiliation, but what you seek in a third party. “Independents are, not surprisingly, the political partisan group most supportive of a third party. Seventy-two percent of political independents support a third major political party. Independents have consistently been the most supportive of a third party.” The poll conducted by Gallup occurs every 3 years and ever since the poll in 2012, support for a major third political party maintained a fluctuation of 50-60%. A third major political party would allow for more room of debate and representatives from each local election engaging in the republic.
Source 4: Interview conducted by NBC Correspondent Simone Boyce
An interview conducted by NBC news that interviews a Libertarian candidate running for governor in the state of New York provides reasoning as to why third parties ultimately cannot win. NBC news maintains a predominant liberal standpoint, especially with one of their anchors, Rachel Maddow. The interviewer who interviewed Larry Sharpe, the Libertarian candidate, is Simone Boyce, who’s left-leaning according to her tweets which oppose Trump but show support for Democratic presidential candidates, like Andrew Yang. However, her bias is hard to unveil as she maintains composure and doesn’t leak out her bias so easily. Boyce conducts the interview pretty professionally and even provides context outside the interview as to why third parties fail. Sharpe even explains his acknowledgment of possibly failing or not winning the governorship, but is not willing to give up so easily and is optimistic about it. A candidate that visits towns other big candidates for the two major parties wouldn’t visit, going live on social media plenty of times, and interacting with the public is a good way to gain recognition and support.
Sharpe stands for legalizing marijuana and wants to maintain rights to gun owners, which appeases both left and right wings. Not to get confused as an Independent, but a Libertarian exercises ultimate freedom to their rights and refuses to have a government tell them what they do. However, not complete anarchy, unless you’re far there in the political compass, but don’t want a limit of their rights. Sharpe acknowledges that if people see you’re neither Democrat or Republican, you shouldn’t even be looked at. Sharpe calls politics a rich man game, and he is not wrong, you only lead in polls if your political establishment backs you or if you’re wealthy. The biggest barrier he claims is the system itself as it’s mainly a two-party government. Money could be the biggest problem but refuted by Donald Green, who’s a political science professor at Columbia University, claims it’s the actual government system that gives no benefits to parties in second or third place. The interviewer sums it up by introducing Duverger’s Law which if you award one office, you have two parties vying for that aforementioned office, this shows me that keeping a party stable and being involved in the government is very competitive and risky business when wanting to be apart of it.
What I Learned:
Third parties are poorly represented and lack the capability of gaining significant strides in local to federal elections, however, such stride can be made. Being more exposed to third parties and what criteria they need to meet to even show on a ballot requires so much patience, effort, and funding. Living in a two-party system, where Republicans and Democrats are what dominant the government, proves difficult for a third party. I align with the Constitution party and believe we do need a third major political party as I don’t agree with the GOP as I feel abandoned, and I don’t align with the Democratic party in any way. I still want to know why third parties are so poorly represented and why Republicans, Democrats dominate the political system for over a century while there have been third party strides in the past.
Bibliography
- Federal Election Commission: Qualifying as a Political Party
https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/registering-political-party/qualifying-political-party/ - Wikipedia’s List of American Third Parties
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States - RJ Reinhart of Gallup News Third-Party Popularity Poll
https://news.gallup.com/poll/244094/majority-say-third-party-needed.aspx - Simone Boyce’s Interview of NYS Libertarian Candidate for Governor
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/why-can-t-third-party-candidates-win-1348512835713
Homework assignments that improved me as a writer:
1. The Declaration of Independence Difficulty Paper
The Declaration of Independence is an important document in the United State’s history on July 4th, 1776, paved the way to what the United States would become. A colony to a world superpower, pushing through advancement, world wars, and economic destruction on some accounts. Jefferson and our founding fathers made it clear the obstruction they had to go through that wanted to make them secede as a colony under Britain’s grasp of being their own country. Pushing for independence has been a struggle for the colony and going through the most powerful army in the world at the time, it wouldn’t be possible for a bunch of fishermen to prevail, but hope was faith was on their side. King George III was the main reason a push for independence occurred as his iron fist didn’t sit right with the colony. “He has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public good”, “He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures”, “He has kept among us in times of peace standing armies and ships of war without the consent of our legislatures” (Jefferson, 1). There are many more reasons as to why the colony decided to break free but the main reason was the incapability of having any representation. King George III ruled the colony without any morals on how the citizens could react and how it would affect them. The king decided what would happen and didn’t have any care for what the legislators thought and this ultimately led to the downfall of his kingdom.
2. What I Learned Rereading First Draft of the Declaration of Independence
After sitting down and rereading the first draft of the DoI, it opened my eyes to a few things I was previously confused about. What I learned that seemed most important to me, however, was that the colony actually warned the British, specifically King George III, about constant pressure. George oppressing the colony by taxation and lack of representation led the colony itself to warn that if it were to continue, they’d break free from British hold. Now, I never knew that the colony actually warned the British about how they were treating them. I always thought it was just a massive self-destruction that occurred without much warning. I still find it so confusing as to why King George III would oppress the colony after the colony is his own people and they were part of the British Kingdom. Why would a King not work with a colony, but oppress it after countless warnings of independence? I’d understand if a nation was a puppet under British rule and was tormented with oppression, but this is merely just a colony, they should be cooperating with one another, but instead, a war broke out. Was King George actually that oppressive towards the colony as well, was he stupid enough to pull himself into a war, and how did they even manage to lose? Britain at the time was considered a superpower and had the best navy in the world and what I can’t get is how they actually lost to their own colony. Failure to supply your army is one thing, but what else was a leading cause of losing? Perhaps the attrition applied by the colonial army was enough for the British to lose with their lack of supplies.
My Final Reflection:
Now, where do I even begin? Although this may not be a big deal to anyone else, but this class being my first English college class drastically affected me as a writer AND reader. I was definitely rejoicing hearing that was absolutely no exams for the semester and writing pieces would instead be graded, I was stoked and I couldn’t wait to get into it. All my previous English classes mainly consisted of tests and essay tests where you’d have to answer questions in regards to a passage or write an essay about a topic you had no interest in, and quite honestly, it resulted in a bad stigma I gained towards English where I resented it. I’d always tell people, “I hate English class but I love to write”. Now, what kind of logic is that? There isn’t any. But after witnessing the huge contrast with the English class I was apart of in my first semester of college and high school English classes.
I’m fully aware other English classes within City Tech would possibly be riddled with exams and such, however, the way Professor Hall taught and gave out assignments, I actually felt attached to the class. I was always interested in what came next and what I’d be able to write about that made my creativity roam wild. The units given by my professor didn’t make me feel limited to anything, besides word limits. This class really made me improve my vocabulary in writing. Neil’s, a classmate of mine, rambling about anything and using such articulate vocabulary, made me improve my speech as well. However, if you read my writing and heard me speak, you’d think a completely different person was writing my pieces.
One report I wrote about the difficulties our founding fathers had upon declaring independence, I feel like I used such strong words, simple but not confusing either. “A colony to a world superpower, pushing through advancement, world wars, and economic destruction on some accounts.” This is in reference to the United States being a minuscule colony for Great Britain back in the 1700s then becoming a world superpower by the early 1900s. Vocabulary has always been my forte and I always seek to improve upon it. Being simple-minded isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but sounding sophisticated and intelligent enough is beneficial for you. Some people may take it as belittling or bullying if someone were to create a discourse using high vocabulary and the other person involved not getting it due to the vocabulary being used. I felt as if this class really improved my usage of vocabulary and my professor guiding me in what words are correct to be used and when.
Other than vocabulary, I wouldn’t say my writing has changed. My grammar was fine the way it was, my spelling is still extravagant, etc. It was a privilege to have Professor Hall as my first English college class, it really made me eager to venture out and proceed with my passion for writing. The advice given is actually quite good and makes me think about how I can actually improve my writing, but it’s something I’ve always had a problem with. This English class made me think more about how to write and what to write rather than worry about exams at the same time. It lets me use my creativity that didn’t feel like it was behind bars or too specific in what I want to write. I didn’t feel like I was writing the exact same thing as someone else and it made me feel good and unique ‘cause it let my creativity roam wild. Professor Hall made my first English class for my first college semester an adventurous one and it really made me feel comfortable with future classes. Although other professors will be entirely different, Hall’s class will definitely make me reminisce about it.
A specific thing I learned in Hall’s class was the genres. I always associated genres primarily with fiction, non-fiction, etc. I never thought I could expand the idea of genres to it being YouTube videos, articles, TV shows, movies, documentaries, etc. I’d like to go more in-depth with this lesson as I can’t wrap my head around what genres could expand into. Other than that, the rest of the class was definitely self-explanatory with the assignments given and how to pass the class. Thank you for making my first semester of college, a great one.
