Modern…Object?

During the Industrial Revolution, which started in England, workers were not considered as subjects. Unfortunately, they were just seen as elements of one or other company. In the film “Modern Times”, Charles Chaplin acts as a worker of a factory who is just drawn with the flow of modernity. The film shows the time of the industrial revolution and all the consequences that had in people’s lives. At the beginning, he was just a worker in a factory who was totally conditioned by that way of living. After being in prison several times, once he was caught in a demonstration and was identified as the leader, he begins working in a restaurant with a girl he met. Unfortunately for him, things never worked out, and he was usually fired.

In that time what people thought had no importance. What were important in those years were production, performance, competence and being better than other companies. Nobody really cared about workers’ rights and every type of demonstration was punished with jail time. Therefore, people had no right of expressing themselves. This is all shown throughout the movie.

We can see perfectly in the development of “Modern Times” that in this period individuals were just seen as objects without opinion, ideas, emotions and so on. It is amazing that due to the modernity, people lost their value and became just numbers of one company. How can we human beings be reduced to that? Were these people so insignificant? I do not think so because people must be considered as subjects, not objects.

Modernity brought improvements for the rich people, but poor people, workers, did not receive any improvements. On the contrary, their problems worsened. This whole idea of being modern was not for everybody and many promises were not fulfilled. Poverty, hunger, children being abused by companies were issues that not the monarchy, nor the Parliament nor companies dealt with.
“Modern times” shows the modernity from a very critical perspective. What is more, companies, rich people and poor people were criticized. In addition, it is a really fun and amusing movie. No wonder why Charles Chaplin is a great inspiration for actors. If you want to find out about modernity, you have to see the movie and judge it by yourself.

Development of the People Power in England

Throughout the culture and civilization class, we have seen that English people have not had many things to say regarding their country which is shocking if we consider that England is a developed country. Every single issue England has had to face had not been discussed by English people. Therefore, English people have not had power until the Victorian age when more and more laws and acts were passed to give rights to the people. Voting and having opinions is extremely relevant if we want to build a country where people are happy and well. Voting in our country, although the citizens have been given the right to vote a long time ago, is not well executed. People vote mainly for the candidate with more charisma without caring if his/her politics and promises address their problems. This is the consciousness I would like to change in our society. The development of the people power in England and how to create awareness in our students concerning voting will be discussed in this paper.

First of all, almost all the time in England there have been monarchies which were and are not chosen by the people. Therefore, Kings and Queens had two choices: being loved or feared. Whenever a King or Queen was not able to enchant people, reigning became really hard. Second of all, along the Royalty, there were Members of Parliament. These members were not chosen by the people either; they paid for their membership, However, many advisors were selected by their skills and capacity; they were selected by the King or Queen. Yet, Members of Parliament were only called when the King or Queen pleased. Thus, although they paid, they did not have much opinion concerning different issues in the country such as justice, war, religion, allies, welfare and economy. For instance, when King Henry VII raised money from everybody, people had no opportunity to say their opinions; neither did the Members of Parliament. Finally, we have common people that had no rights of expressing their opinion or ideas. This lack of “democracy” was so strong that if somebody disagreed with the King or Queen he/she would go to the scaffold. In short, we have a monarchy which was not chosen by the people, Members of Parliament who paid for the membership and advisors who were chosen by the King. People just obeyed as subjects of the Crown.

As seen above, one reason why people did not have the power to make decisions about the country they were living in is lack of money. In those times, if you had money, you could decide the future of your land; although, not always, if you did not, poor you! Another reason is lack of communication between cities. If the King or Queen lived in London and you lived in Lancaster news arrived months later. Therefore, people could not complain about certain issues that were directly affecting them.

Nowadays, three parts form the Parliament of England: the House of Lords, the House of Commons and the Queen. People do have more rights because they have the power of electing different members of parliament of the House of Commons. These elections are made every five years and people can express their opinions and decide which candidate is better and which candidate would help them the most.

Relating this to education, it is of extremely relevance to create and help create awareness in our students about the importance of elections and having the right to vote. Voting is not only marking a paper without considering what is best for our country. Voting is deciding about your future. Many times, adults vote without even knowing what they are doing. Fortunately, this is something we can change being teachers.

Although England is a developed country, people’s rights were given after many years of lack of democracy. Different reasons such as money and communication make people do not really act as individuals that had something to say. Nowadays, English people do have more rights regarding important decisions about the country. I feel a strong commitment to our society; therefore, it is really important to help our students care about how we are building it. I will definitely teach our students about their rights, and making comparisons between other countries will help me do it. We do have to “speak our minds” and make decisions for our future.

Very First Rough Draft

Throughout the culture and civilization class, we have seen that English people have not had many things to say regarding their country which is shocking if we consider that England is a developed country. Every single issue England has had to face had not been discussed by English people. Therefore, English people have not had power until the Victorian age when more and more laws and acts were passed to give the people rights.

First of all, almost all the time in England there have been...

The Power of People Development In England

I. Introduction
II. Historical approach: English people having no opinion in creating their country.
a. Monarchy
b. Parliament
c. People
III. Reasons
a. Communication
b. Money
IV. Evolution: What happens today with people's choices regarding power and country
V. Conclusion: Personal Opinion

Charles II

Charles II was the king of England between 1660 and 1685. He was the son of King Charles I. His restoration to the throne in 1660 when he was 30 years old, was the end of the Republican rule (Commonwealth) in England. When he was 12, his father was part of the Civil War between him and the Parliament. He was named Commander-in-chief in western England when he was 14 years old. After ten years as a king, he was defeated by Cromwell at the battle of Worcester in 1651. As a consequence he was exiled once more. After being in exile, he became King Charles II of England.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPx4KEn9kno

In 1670, he signed a secret treaty with France. This helped his reign with economy and politics. In 1681, he dissolved the Parliament following his father example and ruled alone until his death in 1685. On his death bed, he converted to Catholicism!

Royal cousins

What is more important to you: your family or a crown? Elizabeth and Mary Stuart did not actually know the importance of family for they were cousins fighting over the crown of England. What would you have done? Would you reject a throne for a family member? In the movie Elizabeth, we can see the conflict between Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots and Elizabeth I, Queen of England. Elizabeth was the daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn and Mary Stuart was the daughter of James V of Scotland and great-granddaughter of Henry VII. Catholics did not want Elizabeth in the throne for she was Protestant. Therefore, they claimed that the true heir of England’s throne was Mary Stuart. She also believed herself to be the rightful Queen, so she became part of a scheme created by Phillip II, King of Spain. In the whole, Phillip wanted to have a reason to go to Holy War against England. The reason was given by the death of Mary Stuart.
Elizabeth was a remarkable woman and Queen. I imagine her life was really difficult for all the problems she had in her youth. It is probably hard to forget that your father sent your mother to the scaffold. Besides, it must have been difficult and painful to see that half the country you are fighting for hates you. She even gave up love and never married. I am sure she was in love with Sir Raleigh because he is mentioned in every article about Queen Elizabeth. Her reign was full of sacrifices made for her people.

The movie was very well executed and Cate Blanchett’s performance was outstanding. Her strength was amazing and I shivered every time she faced problems. Elizabeth is an enchanting movie.

Life as a Queen is not a fairy tale.

Stonehenge

According to the reading and the video, Stonehenge was a place of healing. Although I know people before believed in all this type of healing places and beliefs without scientific base, it is amazing and quite hard for me to believe this. I believe that people went there in order to be healed because there was no other kind of medicine available for them.

Sometimes we believe in these things because we do not know how to explain certain phenomena that occurs in our countries or continents. In the case of Stonehenge, people believed in its healing powers that is why they travelled many days to arrive to this place.

In our country, we also have this type of beliefs. For example, people go to Los Andes and they sacrifice their bodies to pay tribute to the saint. Is this really necessary? I believe people exagerate with this Faith demonstrations. If we believe in God and Saints, it is not necessary to sacrifice ourselves because God will help us anyway.

Another thing is that this statements are mainly especulations because we do not have records that prove that this actually happened. For this reason, written records are really important. If only the stones would speak., we would know the real truth about Stonehenge.

Natalia's Presentation

Natalia's presentation was really easy to follow. Her definitions and explanations were really clear and showed her own beliefs. Her topic was interestingly shown and she associated the concepts to education.

I really loved the images she used to introduce the topics. I think her choice of images was very appropriated and related to the topic. I would like her to teach me how to use and create those images!

In general her presentation was very well organized and easy to follow. Moreover, she covered the concepts and related them to education. In my opinion, the only thing she needs to control is her anxiety. I think she gets too nervous and she doesn't have to for she is a great speaker. Sometimes her anxiety made her hesitate in her answers.



Natalia,

Congratulations on such a great presentation.

What is Civilization?

Civilization:

It is a complex society characterized by its agricultural value.
It is a society better organized than others.
Civilization involves everything that people were accustomed to doing.

According to the old definition of civilization, a civilization needs to have, among other characteristics, morality, faith, laws, government, reasoning, philosophy and science. This is what ancient civilizations such as: Greeks, Romans and Hebrews had. Every single one of them gave us some knowledge about civilizations and what their main characteristics are.

Nowadays, civilization is a concept related especially to development and wealth. Countries such as the United States and China are huge civilizations. Civilization is no longer referred to culture, costumes, and religion as before. African countries, even though they have these characteristics, are not considered as civilized countries. The concept has, unfortunately, been narrowed to big buildings and modern stadiums.

In my opinion, civilization has to do with development, but not only with modern constructions. It has to do with how a certain society has learnt from its past and moves towards a future of satisfaction and progress.

Therefore, is Chile a civilized country? I guess we have to think about it.

Source: Wikipedia