Reuven
(Jamie Danna Kolb, Miriam Steinberg, Danielle Maturo, Cory Meyer)
Final Exam: ILS 209
TA: Victoria Healey-Etten
Section # 305
1. Columbus
a.
Columbus Day is a holiday that should continue to be celebrated, as Christopher
Columbus was a fearless leader whose explorations had a profound effect on our world. He
was well respected by his community and he obtained sponsorship for his voyage directly
from the King and Queen of Spain. When observing Columbus Day we are celebrating the
characteristics of a leader and courageous individual. We must remember the brave steps he
took and how his discoveries changed our world today. On Columbus thirty-third day of his
journey, he came upon an unknown, unchartered land that lay between Europe and Asia
the Americas (Zinn, 2). Columbus discovered the Americas and initiated contact between
the Americas and Europe for the first time in history. We must also celebrate Columbus for
his undying love for his religion. He encouraged his peers to return thanks toJesus
Christ, who has bestowed so great a victory and reward upon [them] (Columbus, 328). He
also took on the responsibility of teaching the Indians about religion and without him,
Catholicism would not have come to the New World as early as it did (Lecture, 10/17/11).
Columbus and the Kind of Spain most desired to convert the Indians to the holy faith of
Christfor they [were] very ready and prone (Columbus, 327). Columbus Christianized
the indigenous people and helped them from their opposite ways. He practiced the morally
ordered theory of history because he was acting in the name of God and he believed his
good behavior would ultimately be rewarded. Columbus also proved his loyalty to Christ as
he contributed to so many souls of so many people heretofore last [were] to be saved
(Columbus, 329). Columbus was a devout Christian and fearless leader that should be
rewarded and celebrated.
b.
Christopher Columbus should be denounced and Columbus Day as a U.S. national
holiday should be a day replaced honoring the indigenous peoples of the Americas.
Columbus was an inhumane character from history and should not be celebrated, as he
caused genocide of the indigenous people. In Columbus letter to Gabriel Sanchez, he freely
admits to enslaving the indigenous people of the island, and believes these actions are
acceptable (327). Columbus also took some of [the Indians] aboard ships as prisoners
because he insisted that they guide him to the source of gold (3). He had no regard for
fellow human beings and was very entitled, and neither of these characteristics should be
celebrated. Instead, the indigenous people of the Americas, who so kindly welcomed
Columbus and his crew, should be recognized. The Indians were generous people who
[exchanged] valuable things for trifles and Columbus took advantage of their naivety
(Columbus, 326). The Spaniards treated the Indians cruelly and forced appalling acts upon
them. Zinn details the horrendous actions of the Spaniards onto the Indians by knifing
Indians by tens and twenties and of cutting slices off them to test the sharpness of their
blades (6). Columbus and his followers were also known to [ride the] backs of Indians if
there were in a hurry and at other times, cut off their hands and bleed to death (Zinn, 6, 2).
The indigenous people of the Americas should be celebrated and Columbus should be
denounced due to his awful treatment of fellow humans.
c.
Had Columbus followed the ethical guidelines of the Dalia Lama, he would have
treated the indigenous people of the Americas very differently. One can make the argument
that Columbus would have never traveled to the Americas if this were his ultimate goal. An
example is the Dalia Lamas viewpoint on the desire for wealth. Columbus explicitly states
that he took Indians aboard ship as prisoners because he insisted that they guide him to the
source of gold (Zinn, 3). This goes against the Dalia Lamas philosophy that people who
desire wealth and material things are so caught up with the idea of acquiring more that they
make no room for anything else in their lives (Dalia Lama, 5). If Columbus followed the
ways and philosophies of the Dalia Lama he would not have desired gold and wealth on his
journey and the voyage would have never occurred. The Dalia Lama thinks that people who
want more are disillusioned and believe that they never have enough. The Dalia Lama also
preaches about the Tibetan feeling of empathy, or the supreme emotion, which translates
directly to the inability to bear the sight of anothers suffering (Dalia Lama, 64). This
virtue goes against the actions of Columbus. He forced the Indians to collect a certain
quantity of gold and if they were not able to, they had their hands cut off and bled to
death (Zinn, 4). Zinn also goes to describe how Columbus enslaved for sex and labor,
knifed to death and ultimately took advantage of the Indians. If Columbus were truly unable
to experience others suffering he would never have been able to perform such actions. Not
only was he witnessing other suffer; he was the root of their suffering and unhappiness.
Another way Columbus journey would have been different is if he agreed with and
practiced the Dalia Lamas belief that whether or not a person is a religious believe does
not matterfar more important is that they be a good human being (Dalia Lama, 19).
Columbus was so engrossed in converting the indigenous people to Catholicism and
believed that he was benefiting the Indians by initiating their conversion to the holy faith of
Christ (Columbus, 327). With his strong desire to convert them, he lost sight of the
importance and unity that comes along with accepting every human being, regardless of
religion. Columbus was not focused on being a good person, but rather forcing the
teachings and religion of Christ onto the indigenous people. The Dalia Lama has a very
different perspective on weapons then Christopher Columbus had. The Dalia Lama believes
that weapons exist solely to destroy human beings [and] peace is purely dependent on
disarmament (Dalia Lama, 205-6). Columbus placed an importance on the possession of
arms and found it necessary to explain that the Indians do not bear arms and do not know
them (Zinn, 1). If Columbus had rejected the use of weaponry he would have been a more
peaceful and noble individual. Columbus journey and treatment would have been
drastically different had he followed the ethical guidelines of the Dalia Lama.
d.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR and the two covenants on Civil
and Political Rights (ICCPR), and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR),
provides specific guidelines that everyone should be entitled to. When Columbus
discovered the New World and the indigenous people he made then mine for gold. He went
against the ICESCR Article 7 which guarantees every the right to just and favourable
working conditions (Wikipedia). Zinn describes the policy enacted by Columbus and the
Spaniards that required all persons fourteen years or older to collect a certain quantity of
gold (Zinn, 4). Had Columbus followed the rules enforced by the ICESCR he would not
have required the Indians to work in unjust conditions. Additionally, when he first came to
the Americas he took some of them aboard as prisoners (Zinn, 3). This action goes against
Article 8 of the ICCPR, which prohibits slavery and enforced servitude in all situations
(Wikipedia). Columbus enslaved the indigenous people while the article does not allow the
enslavement of human beings. Lastly, the ICESCR guarantees everyone the right to the
enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (Wikipedia).
This right was violated as the Spaniards hunted, killed, burned and hanged Indians for no
apparent reason (Zinn, 4). Had Columbus followed the guidelines proposed in these
covenants the indigenous people would have experienced more humane conditions.
2. Oppression
a.
Rigoberta Mench
a.i.
Rigoberta Mench identifies the oppressed, as the indigenous people of Guatemala,
or the Indians, and the oppressors as the government, wealthy landowners and their
overseers (Mench, 1984).
a.ii.
Rigoberta Mench was a leader in her community who fought for social change. She
had a strong desire to learn about the world outside of the Altiplano. With her strong
personality, she worked to stop the oppression. At the start she was a part of the radical
group practicing active, collective, non-cooperation. She later decided to use her
knowledge to resist the oppression, using passive non-cooperation.
a.iii.
The Indians formed the Peasant Unity Committee (CUC), after repeated discontent
with the landowners and (Mench, government 1984). The CUC aimed to fight against
the wealthy businessmen and government. Mench was a leader in her community and
helped to develop ways to combat the Guatemalan army and protect the Indians lands.
Mench won the Nobel Peace Prize, her book was published and the Guatemalan
government was hugely embarrassed; clearly her strategies worked as proof of this end
result.
a.iv.
Mench chose these strategies because they worked. When she found her strategy
to be ineffective she reevaluated and converted strategies to make them work. Mench
described her transition as she began working in a peasant organization and went on to
another stage in [her] life (Mench, 149). This highlights her dedication of changing
strategies to make sure they were working.
b.
Women in southern Vietnam
b.i.
Lady Barton identifies the oppressed as the Southern Vietnamese people and the
oppressors were the French and Japanese, who ruled Vietnam prior to World War II and
during World War II (Barton, 1995).
b.ii.
The women of Southern Vietnam used collective, active, non-cooperation as their
strategy of resistance to stop the oppression. Lady Borton explains that the women
communally had to rise up. [They] made fake guns out of water-palm stems [and]
set off homemade explosives (76).
b.iii.
Women in Southern Vietnam proved that their strategies worked by liberating
various villages. Lady Borton describes that the women rose up! Thats how [they]
liberated Ban Long in 1960under Mrs. Dinhs command, the women liberated three
districts (77). The women were so successful in fighting their oppressors that the
puppet troops were terrified to cross over from their base at Vinh Kim because Second
Sense controlled the territory on the other side (Lady Borton, 98). Clearly the women
of Southern Vietnam were able to use effective strategies.
b.iv.
The women of Southern Vietnam used collective, active, non-cooperation because
these strategies worked. They were able to outsmart their oppressors and this strategy
proved to be very effective for them. The puppet troops were after Second Harvest
because she fought with her mouth. Thats what made [her] effective (Lady Borton,
99). The women of Southern Vietnam were able to use effective strategies because they
were clever and they did what was necessary regardless of their actions being ethical or
not.
c.
Badshah Khan
c.i.
The Pathans, an Islamic group led by Badshah Kahn, were the oppressed and the
British were the oppressors (Easwaran, 1984).
c.ii.
Badshah Kahn used collective, active, non-violent, non-cooperation as their strategy
to stop the oppression by the British government. Badshah Kahns vow to non-violence
is ever prevalent with his organization of an army of non-violent soldierspledged to
fight: not with guns but with their lives (Easwaran , 110). Additionally, his nonviolence is highlighted by his promise to refrain from violence and from taking
revenge. [he] promise[s] to forgive those who [oppressed him] (Easwaran, 111).
c.iii.
Badshah Kahns strategy to create a movement of nonviolence was successful in that
he was able to mobilize this group of people and they collectively worked to achieve
their goal. This is highlighted by the nature of the organization. The army was
completely voluntary; even the officers gave their services for free (Easwaran, 112).
The Pathans movement to resist and stop the oppression worked because they were able
to organize the Servants of God.
c.iv.
Badshah Kahn used these strategies because they were ethically correct. Any Pathan
who vowed to non-violence was accepted to serve as a Servant of God. The members of
the army each said, I promise to refrain from violence and from taking revenge. I
promise to forgive those who oppress me or treat me with cruelty (Easwaran, 112).
Badshah Kahns devotion to his faith is clear when he and the Servants of God chanted
we are the army of GodFreedom is our goal (Easwaran, 113). Badshah Kahn was
able to organize an army that was ethical to resist the British.
d.
Palestinians
d.i.
The oppressed were identified as the Palestinian civilians who were fighting for their
lands, while the oppressors were the Jews who were in fact Israeli troops and
government (Elder, 11/9/11).
d.ii.
The Palestinian people practiced collective, active, violent, non-cooperation as their
strategy to resist the oppression. They organized the Palestinian Liberation Organization
(PLO) and intifadas to fight against Jews in Israel and the UN (Elder, 11/9/11).
d.iii.
The Palestinians violent strategies were partly unsuccessful. In 2005 Ariel Sharon
ordered Israelis to withdraw from the Gaza Strip (Elder, 11/9/11). It is evident that
the Palestinians strategies were somewhat effective in that they were able to get some
sort of response from the Israeli government.
d.iv.
The Palestinians chose these strategies because they thought it would work, not
because they felt these strategies were ethically correct. Elder explains, In 2000 second
intifada generated increased violence in West Bank, Gaza and Israel (Elder 11/9/11).
Clearly their use of increased violence goes against their ethical morals and is used in
hopes to cause change.
e.
Osama Bin Laden
e.i.
Osama Bin Laden identifies the oppressed as the Muslims or Allahs followers in
Palestine and Lebanon who he called we. Bin Laden identified the oppressors as
America and the political leaders associated with the United States, he called these
individuals them or they.
e.ii.
Osama Bin Laden looked to punish the Americans as his strategy to stop the
oppression, using collective, active, and violent. In his speech to he elaborates on this
desire to penalize the Americans in order that they taste some of what we tasted (Bin
Laden 2). He recounts the tragedies of the demolished towers in Lebanon and that is
what compelled him to punish the Americans, or oppressors. He also made his
strategies clear when he addressed the Americans saying, as you kill you shall be
killed (1).
e.iii.
Bin Laden used his strategy of punishment by attacking the World Trade Centers
because he knew this would work. Bin Laden proves his confidence in his strategy by
explaining as for its results, they have been, by the grace of Allah, positive and
enormous, and have, by all standards, exceeded all expectations (Bin Laden, 3). Bin
Laden hoped to punish the American people and his attack on the World Trade Centers
did exactly that.
e.iv.
Bin Laden chose this strategy oh having the American people experience pain
because he knew it would work and because he thought his actions were ethical. Bin
Laden asks, Should a man be blamed for defending his sanctuary? (Bin Laden 2). Bin
Laden believed that his actions were justifiable and that the American people should feel
the same pain that his followers, in particular women and children, experienced need to
defend one more than the other.
f.
f.i.
Nelson Mandela (Handout on apartheid, movie, lecture)
The Apartheid government, the National Party, was identified as the oppressors,
white South Africans who were the minority but wanted to maintain political and
economic control. The oppressed was the non-white Africans located in South Africa.
f.ii.
Nelson Mandela altered his strategies to combat the oppression of the South African
minority. At first, he led active non-violence, non-cooperation, and then moved to
violence then back again to non-violence. Mandela became the president of the African
National Congress (ANC), which was formed to protect the rights of Africans,
especially in parts of Africa dominated by Whites (Elder, 11/21/11). Mandela then
changed his approach and realized that violence was necessary to end Apartheid
(Elder, 11/21/11). Mandela once again changed his strategy after he was released from
prison to non-violence.
f.iii.
It is difficult to tell how apartheid ended but he enacted a large process and his
actions put other things in motion to end apartheid. Mandelas actions alone did not end
it. Mandela inspired other leaders like Mkhuseli Jack to fight against Apartheid by
organizing Black boycotts of White stores as an alternative to violence (Elder, 11/21).
Later on, South Africa experienced their first democratic election, which ended with the
election of Nelson Mandela and the ANC (Elder 11/21).
f.iv.
Nelson Mandela chose strategies that were ethically correct, which is highlighted by
his changing of strategies. He recognized that non-violence was only temporarily
effective so he moved to violence, which he thought would work better. After his release
from prison he reverted back to non-violence because he believed ethically that was
correct.
Word Count: 2790