I'm reading "thought essays" I had my students write on the modern meaning of the American Revolution (an assignment sparked by the Modern Tea Party) and I felt I had to post a few sections from the essay below. Keep in mind he's a junior in high school...
Tea Party Extended Journal...
The colloquial definition of Kitsch is, and I'm paraphrasing, a jejune object that idea or object that panders to what the general public. However, I am using Kitsch as defined by the Unbearable lightness of being, a novel by Milan Kundera. According to him, Kitsch is essentially the denial of an obvious or unpleasant truth.
Before I get too sidetracked by that which isn't immediately relevant, I feel obligated to point out the connection between kitsch and the Tea Party. The modern Tea party decided that they had the ability to magically know what the founding father's would've wanted when they wrote the constitution. Furthermore, they use the original tea party as their excuse for their disreputable actions even though the events they cited didn't really play out the way they described. In fact, as I learned more about the Tea Partiers, it became readily apparent that they didn't know anything about the revolution, or at least, they didn't cite any actual facts. This indicates that they are ignoring the nastier parts of History. This ties into my previous mention of Kitsch as it shows that either the Tea Partiers knows what had actually happened and is using Kitsch as a method of both justifying their actions and the founding father's actions or the much more likely option, which would be that they don't know, and in this case one would find Kitsch in the Educational system, as it is that which “teaches” America “History”...
...I [also} noticed that none of what we learned about in unit about the American revolution actually correlated with what I observe that America wants us to believe. School house rock, for instance didn't account for slavery, or the Indians, and put all the blame on Britain. This is relevant because then the question of who actually wanted slavery becomes unanswerable because there is no evidence of any colonists wanting unity. The underclass wanted independence, and the Upper class promised it, but it was implemented in a way so the Upper class still maintained power. Note that the upper class only agreed to formally break away from Britain because everyone else had and they wanted to maintain their wealth. All of these seemingly events make me wonder if anyone really wanted the united states of America. The upperclass didn't, as they were perfectly happy with Britain, until their hand was forced. Britain didn't, as they lost potential tax revenue and trading, even though all of their taxes were rebuffed, and the Lower class didn't really want it, as they were more concerned about representation.
Finally, I feel the need to mention that we call ourselves the United states of America, but we have never been united. This is the cost of democracy, for as long as people are allowed to have different view points and protect their interests, people will do so, even at the cost of our nation as a whole. Poor Britain, having to deal with the colonists."
No comments:
Post a Comment