Crucifix

Abstract

A crucifix is religious symbol, used by Christians, as a reminder of the crucifixion of their deity Jesus Christ. People will wear crucifix jewelry around their neck to show their faith, ward off evil spirits or some people even were them to upset other religious groups. The crucifix symbol can be found on T-shirts, bumper stickers, religious flyers, cartoons, displayed at religious holidays and of course in its real form for extra symbolism. (see Figure 1: Crucifix)

The diversity of Christian belief causes stress in some cultures where Christian zealots have caused harm to others or used religion to persecute others, hence when in the company of others or in other countries, the outward wearing of the crucifix should be avoided.

The Deity and the Symbol

A crucifix is religious symbol, used by Christians, as a reminder of the crucifixion of their deity Jesus Christ. It is believed that this man was a god on earth in human form, whom delivered believers from eternal damnation caused by their sins, some 2000 years ago. The Christians believe a religious group known as Jews put the Christ to death on the cross; hence, there is some tension between the two religions in some sects but not all. Christian zealots have in the past persecuted and indeed waged wars against people around the world for opposing religious beliefs.

Wear the Goods

People will wear crucifix jewelry around their neck to show their faith, ward off evil spirits or some people even wear them to upset other religious groups. Generally, the crucifix is worn only by Christians wanting to give an outward sign to those around them of their deep belief in the Christ deity. Generally, non-Christians resent the exposure to the crucifix believing that it is being thrown in their face. Schools in some countries ban the wearing of crucifixes or any religious symbolism for that matter (wikinews 2005) (hrw.org 2005).

Keep it to yourself

The diversity of Christian belief causes stress in some cultures where Christian zealots have caused harm to others or used religion to persecute others, hence when in the company of others or in other countries, the outward wearing of the crucifix should be avoided.

The meaning and practice of Christianity is very broad and practiced in many different ways by hundreds of sects. The diversity of Christian belief causes stress in some cultures where zealots have harmed other due to religious beliefs. The Holy Wars between the Islamic and Christians alone should impress all to show restraint with religious symbolism in the homeland and abroad. When traveling or moving to foreign countries it is vital that old beliefs and customs not be pushed on the new natives, the results will be anger and resentment.

What I believe

I believe that any outward expression of religious, political, social, and dress beliefs should be kept to oneself in the country or out of the country. I consider bad manners to my opinions on others unless we have gathered to have open discussion as friends. Among foreigners, it is essential to understand that most non-Americans do not like Americans. Most cultures find us arrogant, loud, egocentric, and ignorant. My children have traveled to Europe with their colleges and are told not to wear any items that outwardly show they are Americans or their religious beliefs as it would upset the foreigners.

What I need to keep

I wear no jewelry, non-descript clothing, plain shoes, no facial hair, no perfumes, and no makeup. I would have a problem giving up running, sanitary water, clean clothes, shoes, medications, coffee, deodorant and a bug free environment. I believe I would have no problem being polite and non-offensive but I would miss the comforts we enjoy in America.

Reference:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/British_schoolgirl_told_to_return_home_for_wearing_crucifix

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/16/turkey12038.htm

Melting Pot?

The United States is as much a melting pot as it has been at any time in it’s brief past. The people living through the mass immigrations of bygone years established homeland communities, which allowed marriage to like thinking mates from like thinking families from the homeland. People in these enclaves found comfort in the shared problems and solutions to being in a new country. Enclaves existed for each ethnicity and most immigrants shunned other immigrants just as the whitey Americans shunned all of them. It takes years to overcome and accept outsiders, but as children mingle and make friends with outsiders, acceptance begins.

My children are far more accepting of outsiders than I am because of their greater exposure to the various ethnicities. It is not wrong or right that the older generations cannot be as flexible in understanding as the new generation. The next generation will think the previous was inflexible as well and this continues for each successive generation.

Interethnic marriages seem queer to the old because they still hear the echo of their parents and grandparents extolling how wrong it is. The echo fades with each new generation. The dirty, conniving Cubans, Mexicans, and Indian/Asians we complain about today are the Slavs, Italians, Germans, and Irish of our ancestors.

The Melting Pot lives.

We all love the varied foods that each culture brings with it. As a child, my mother made Mexican rice, which was Minute Rice with tomato soup mixed in. Today we have fabulous Mexican restaurants and I know what Mexican food should taste like. How about the French, Italian, Indian, Mandarin, Tai, Cajun, and German restaurants we all enjoy, they transplanted from other cultures and have changed part of the American culture. Now people take trips to see German Villages, Italian and Slovak festivals because those cultures assimilated into America. Today only remnants of the old enclaves remain since they gradually integrated into America. America is more politically correct today because we works with many different peoples on a daily basis and we are actually aware that we are no better than they are, just different.

The changes each ethnic group brings are subtle and filtered through American society until all accept part. You see we really do try to adapt to each other but it takes time

Empire

Empire is a nation that has military superiority over all nations of the world and uses that power to influence activities of other nations.

The United States emerged as an empire following the conclusion of WW II. Following then end of WW II each action the USA takes has repercussions for every nation of the world directly or indirectly. American leaders strive to influence the political makeup of all nations.

America spends more on it’s military than the next 22 largest counties combined, and that figure does not include money spent on active conflicts which would double the US spending figure and would put it’s spending at more than the rest of the world combined.

Due to the technological and monetary commitment to its military the United States enjoys free reign over world events. Although the US requests the approval of friendly nations before proceeding with global actions, it is just as likely to act without any approval even from its closest allies, which it of course does not need. In reality the US answers only to its voters at election time, for once elected the President has free reign to determine world events for 4 years.

In its short history Americas leaders positioned the nation as the most powerful empire the world has known

Tension in the Mideast

Abstract

Tension in the Mideast took a huge leap in July of 1956 when Egypt seized the Suez Canal and claimed it to be its own. Amid increasing tensions in the Mideast three western allies, Britain, France and Israel (The West Tripartite Group) plotted and carried out an attack against Egypt, which was backed by Jordan and Syria (The Mideast Tripartite Group), on October 28, 1956. The attack, defeat, and occupation of Egypt lasted until December 2, 1956 when all foreign troops evacuated. Had the nations involved in the 1956 Egyptian War been moving toward a culture of peace the entire incident could have been avoided.

It’s mine mine mine!

Tension in the Mideast took a huge leap in July of 1956 when Egypt seized the Suez Canal and claimed it to be its own. Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser had been antagonizing the Israelis for several years with on again off again by closing the Suez Canal to Jewish traffic and finally in 1956 with the backing of the Soviet Union he seized the canal for the glory of Egypt. In the eyes of the British and French this was tantamount to stealing the canal as they had a company set up which owned the canal. The Egyptians agreed to pay the stockholders for the canal but that did not appease France or Great Britain (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/egypt2.htm).

No, it’s ours!

Amid increasing tensions in the Mideast three western allies, Britain, France and Israel plotted and carried out an attack against Egypt on October 28, 1956. The West Tripartite Group struck simultaneously and brutally; completely overwhelming Egypt and securing the canal as well as occupying the country in a few days of fierce fighting and bombings.

Ok it’s yours

The attack, defeat, and occupation of Egypt lasted until December 2, 1956 when all foreign troops evacuated. The Russians threatened missile attacks against Britain and France if they did not immediately withdraw. The United States was embroiled in ramping up Vietnam, the Cold War, and reeling from the beating in Korea, hence was in no mood for the antics of The West Tripartite Group (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/egypt2.htm). With the two world Superpowers demanding the end of the attacks and the withdrawal of troops The West Tripartite Group had little choice but to withdraw from Egypt.

Can’t we all just get along?

Had the nations involved in the 1956 Egyptian War been moving toward a culture of peace the entire incident could have been avoided. If I was an Egyptian in 1956, I might think. The Jews have stolen our land and with the help of the infidels from France and England they are going to take over the canal and then the whole country. The Jews have always wanted what is ours, they spread their lies and deceit about a false God, they allow their women to flaunt their bodies and talk back to men. Can any disciple of Allah envision being ordered about by satanic hoards from Israel and their friends? We must keep the canal for ourselves, we must bring about the destruction of the Jews whom are bent on taking what is ours.

The article Moving from a Culture of War to a Culture of Peace in summary makes valid points and conclusions and I agree with the culture of peace goals in general. The link the author attempts to make between war and men with the glory of the peaceful woman is illusive to me as it has the ring of the “man is inherently evil” mantra that religious fanatics love to use. The “instead of” points make logical sense, and over time we are moving in that direction. I do think that he should look at the international communities response to dictatorships and the ending of these types of egomaniacal leader societies, which are breeding grounds for the same.

Conclusion

Due to the culture of war that plagues the world Egypt took actions to injure the Jews, specifically blocking their use of the Suez Canal, without understanding the anger it would create with other nations whom had stakes in the instrument of injury. The Western Tripartite acted impulsively and failed to understand that by the canal passing through Egypt they had every right to feel it should be under their control. Egypt failed to realize the Suez should be under their control but should be available to all nations without prejudice in order to maintain peace. Although Egypt in essence won the war and controls the canal, they learned a valuable lesson about how attacks on one nation can cause catastrophic actions buy many other countries to the point where they saw that in reality their fate is held in the hands of the superpowers.

Reference:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Suez_War.html

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/egypt2.htm

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_256.shtml

http://www.virtualcitizens.com/pictures/bosworth_2006-07-28.gif

http://files.uzitalk.com/reference/pages/IDF.htm

The Sermon On The Mall

The Sermon On The Mall

By Daniel Gross

I found a great article on Christmas of all things, can you imagine. Americans, Romans, Jews, Muslims all found their way into the article and give the image that Christmas may be more than a Christian holiday, perhaps it is a holiday for the world to enjoy together. The author eludes to the various peoples in the context of a Christian holiday, hence giving the illusion that the disparate cultures will some how share or have shared in the holiday. Suddenly the author makes an abrupt turn for the rest of the article and relates it only to the American Christmas shopping season, which is where he was heading all along, forgetting that there are more than just Americans contributing to the economic impact of the holiday in the nation. Albeit this is America, the impact of non-Americans in this country on the economy is huge and apparently forgotten for the purpose of this article. The article promotes the stereotype of the American consumer being uncontrolled, irresponsible, and implies that it (spending) is one of the laughable strengths the American culture depends on. The author tries to pass off as comedy what may be more than a stereotype of the American culture, which is we are to focused on material possessions, getting high off the high life, and spending ,always spending, beyond our means.

Egypt

Abstract

Egypt was and is greatly influence by the infusion of technology from other cultures, specifically from the French and British. The French followed by the British both felt that they could educate and bring culture to the ignorant Egyptians. The Egyptians had learned through the ages that new ideas did not translate into a better life and would not readily adopt the advancements forced upon them by the new invaders. The infusion of new technology does not usually blend well with the old ways of a culture, but the Amish and the conservative Jews have managed the have the best of both cultures.

Whip-em Into Shape

Egypt was and is greatly influenced by the infusion of technology from other cultures, specifically from the French and British. The French influenced the elites into building the new Cairo (Mitchell pg.63) according French Tradition and the British, brought the Elites, their way of government (Mitchell pg.34).

In the winter of 1867–68 Ali Mubarak, an accomplished Egyptian administrator, teacher and engineer, travelled to Paris on financial business for the Egyptian government, and to visit the Exposition Universelle. He stayed several weeks, as he later described in some detail, studying the new Parisian systems of education and of sewerage. He examined the buildings, the books, and the curricula of the new schools, and walked with other visitors along the enormous tunnels of the sewage system built beneath the boulevards of Haussmann's new city. On his return to Egypt he was appointed Minister of Schools and Minister of Public Works, and over the following decade he laid out and began building the modern city of Cairo and the modern system of education. (Mitchell pg.63)

The Ignorant Natives

The French followed by the British both felt that they could educate and bring culture to the ignorant Egyptians and to some extent, they did but only to the elites. The Egyptian peasant class ignored the Brits as another annoying new fangled occupier. Indeed the French felt that virtual enslavement was the only way to get the native to understand how ignorant they were. Control their bodies so that their mind will eventually follow (Mitchell 95).

Another New Boss to Break In!

The Egyptians have learned through the ages that new ideas do not translate into a better life and would not readily adopt the advancements forced upon them new invaders. The poor Egyptians have been exposed to great conquerors and the not so great conquerors for thousands of years. Egypt looks upon conquerors as people they need to get along without resorting to constant violence, instead they practice more of a passive aggressive stance or just plain act stupid and lazy when obviously due to the hard life they live they are not (Hopwood pg.5).

New + Old = Harmony

The infusion of new technology does not usually blend well with the old ways of a culture, but the Amish and the conservative Jews have managed the have the best of both cultures. The conservative Jew still embraces kosher food, traditional dress and ritual customs in the home at a minimum, and many outside the home also. The conservative Amish keep the home free of technology and fancy things, while many at work utilize technology through an intermediary and a very few embrace technology themselves outside the home (Rheingold). In Egypt technology changed the way the entire country farms, but their religion, and poverty levels remain unchanged (LOC). Though the peasants’ economic status remains unchanged, they are displaced from their small farms and forced to moved to the cities where they remain unemployed.

Conclusion

The knee jerk reaction is to think that technology will make everything in everyone’s life better, but in reality not all people embrace technology and certainly, technology fails to make all things better. Technological changes for the Egyptians created a larger elite class and a small middle class while taking away the way of life for the poor peasant farmers whom have lived the same contented way for thousands of years. As an advanced society we assume we have the best life and ancient way equal stupidity, and poverty when in reality those that follow the old ways are not miserable. In many cases ignorance of the new ways is bliss, as the backwards people never realize they are unhappy until they are told (Ronsuskind).

Reference:

http://www.ronsuskind.com/newsite/articles/archives/000033.html - Ronsuskind

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.01/amish_pr.html - Rheingold

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/egtoc.html - LOC

Colonising Egypt : Mitchell, Timothy. Berkeley University of California Press, 1988 eBook ISBN: 9780585116723 Egypt--Relations--Europe. Egypt--Civilization--1798-

Egypt, Politics and Society, 1945-1990, Hopwood, Derek. London ; New York Routledge, 2002. eBook ISBN: 9780203304266 ISBN: 97

Hopwood

Abstract

Hopwood found that when the French took over Egypt in the late 1700 they began a large immigration of Europeans, which stayed until the 1950’s. The rest live in the cities and consider themselves the elites (Hopwood page 6). Egypt’s education system is largely influenced by the Islamic religion. Egyptian society is homogeneous—Muslim and Arab. There is, however, a large minority. The Christian Copts are the descendants of the first Egyptian converts to Christianity and, therefore, of the original Pharaonic inhabitants.(page 171) Egyptian society is basically homogeneous—Muslim and Arab. Marriage is naturally at the centre of life and Islamic law has closely governed its provisions. The ideal laid down by Egyptian textbooks is that woman is made for marriage, that she should obey her husband, stay at home and love her children. The ideal husband should love his wife (no mention is made of love of the wife for him), treat her well and be responsible for her. ‘God dislikes divorce’ because permanence in marriage is of value to the children. Polygamy is not forbidden; neither is it encouraged. In practice, Egyptian women writers complain, marriage is still a very unequal partnership(Booth pg.169).

Migration and Immigration in the 19th and 20th centuries

Hopwood found that when the French took over Egypt in the late 1805 they began a large immigration of Europeans, which stayed until 1952. (Hopwood pg. 6). The influx of Europeans built a new Cairo, which was more organized and prettier to look at, adjacent to the old part of the city. (Hopwood pg. 11). The Europeans treated the Egyptians like they were criminals, requiring them to live as if in a barracks, to walk outside required the Egyptians to produce papers and identification, they were under constant surveillance, and surrendered their crops to the government (Mitchell pg.34). With political upheaval in 1952, there was a huge exodus, which left Egypt a country of 97% natives mainly Arabs and Muslims. Today, the current makeup of population in Egypt is nearly 60% peasant. Fortunately, the peasants do not feel that is a bad thing, as they have lived for thousands of years this way and like it as they are very suspicious of new ways(Hopwood pg.162 ).

Education Today

Education is compulsory for a basic nine-year cycle but attendance not enforced; approximately 16 percent of school-age children do not attend. (Library of Congress-LOC) Egyptian culture is mainly that of peasants (60%) and the peasants feel that a formal education is neither needed nor desired. In the minds of the peasants, the outsiders are not to be trusted with their new ideas. The peasants prefer to pass on to their children all they need to know. (Hopwood pg.163 ). Outwardly, the appearance is that ignorant peasants are unaware of the value of education, but from the peasants view education is just a bunch of new ideas that the latest government is espousing. Soon, the peasant believes, the government changes and new ideas must be learned, henceforth the best plan is to keep isolated and let the governments come and go.

Family and Social Structure

The focus of Egyptian life today is marriage, with the males being the dominant and important person. Women are second class citizens with little exceptions as the old ways of the peasants linger due to their poor education. Egypt remains under the social, political, and cultural dominance of the elite, a pattern it has retained since pharaonic times. (LOC) The Islamic religion greatly influences the daily life, education, marriage, and politics of the nation as it has for thousands of years. Most foreigners were forced out of the country in the 1950’s and today a small number of elite Arabs and Muslims enjoy all the political and economic wealth. Under British and French rule in the past

In the second quarter of the nineteenth century the people of Egypt were made inmates of their own villages. A government ordinance of January 1830 confined them to their native districts, and required them to seek a permit and papers of identification if they wished to travel outside. 'It was scarcely possible', we are told, 'for a fellah to pass from one village to another without a written passport.' The village was to be run like a barracks, its inhabitants placed under the surveillance of guards night and day, and under the supervision of inspectors as they cultivated the land - and surrendered to the government warehouse its produce (Mitchell pg.34).

Women although their status has improved in the last 20 years are, predominantly, relegated to being submissive to men. Throughout Muslim-majority societies today, advertising life histories of the earliest Muslim women is one potent way to articulate visions of what gender ought to mean in a modern society (Booth pg. 281).

Conclusion

Egypt has seen conquers come and go yet for thousands of years they have lived the same basic peasant lives. They have no desire for the new ways of the world such as wealth, technology, and politics. To the native Egyptian the land and the Nile River have always provided for them and always will, the governments and conquerors are minor inconveniences. Husbands, wife’s and their children have to work the land and river and wish to be alone, their tip of the iceberg is that they appear poor and stupid to outsiders but outsiders fail to see that their simple ways have worked for thousands of years without interference and they have found happiness and contentment. The peasants shake their heads at outsiders strange ways and wonder why they never learn.

Reference:

Egypt, Politics and Society, 1945-1990, Hopwood, Derek. London ; New York Routledge, 2002. eBook ISBN: 9780203304266 ISBN: 9780203204573, Subject: Egypt--History--1952-

May Her Likes Be Multiplied : Biography and Gender Politics in Egypt, Booth, Marilyn. Berkeley University of California Press, 2001. eBook ISBN: 9780585389295 English

Colonising Egypt : Mitchell, Timothy. Berkeley University of California Press, 1988 eBook ISBN: 9780585116723 Egypt--Relations--Europe. Egypt--Civilization--1798-

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/egtoc.html#eg0006