Budrus; a film by Julia Bacha and Just Vision
Separation of Identity.
“Something there is that doesn’t love a wall”.
~ Robert Frost, The Mending Wall
|
Don’t miss Budrus! A visualization of Israeli-Palestinian barriers, dialogue, and cooperative activism.
There is an old saying that goes something like this, “good fences make good neighbors.” Perhaps Robert Frost is best known for his use of the proverb in his poem The Mending Wall (1914). Logically, a fence may help parties visualize a recognized and accepted boundary line. Fences may enhance relationships by simply keeping unintended, as well as intended, encroachments upon a neighbor from occurring. However, fences may have negative connotations. A fence may limit the free exercise of natural rights. It may become a wall, where one party excludes another party from equal ingress and egress to property, free social intercourse, and self-determination. As Frost so aptly points out, “there is something in nature that inherently dislikes a wall.” Frost supports the premise that while fences do have positive uses to protect the person and property, they may become walls affecting the potential for interaction and cooperation. In short, they may become barriers to meaningful communication.
Anyone who has visited Israel and traveled to the West Bank will surely…….
Read my full review at my other blog on social media at http://socialcontexts.wordpress.com/2011/06/11/budrus-by-julia-bacha-and-justvision/
Malcolm L. Rigsby is a faculty member in the department of sociology at Henderson State University, Arkansas. He is completing his Ph.D.(abd), at Texas Woman’s University, Denton, Texas. In 1979 he received his B.A.T. from Sam Houston State University, in History and Education with a minor in Sociology. He holds his J.D. from St. Mary’s University School of Law (1989) and is a licensed attorney in Arkansas and Texas. He is active in the independent review of documentary film.
Equality and Civil Rights #12
The active seeking of recognition of and implementation of “civil rights” is integral to defining American democracy. It requires the balancing of the need for order and law vs. assuring freedom through limitation of the rule of central power. Yet ruling central power is integral to the processes by which authority overrides unique propensities of independent collectivities of people (states) to seek the status quo. For 1oo years the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and later futile revisions lay almost dormant until spear-headed by John F. Kennedy and posthumously enacted the 1964 Act finally emerged. What had been a law without recourse became a law with ”teeth” that allowed for mandating and enforcing accomodations that surpassed the concept of “separate, but equal”.
We often think of the struggle of the African-American when the term Civil Rights is mentioned. However, this term has meaning, both procedurally and substantively for many groups. It is in effect because of a small section of text buried in the 1866 act that civil rights has meaning for more than African Americans. Section 1981 of the 1966 act has enabled many groups defined as Native Americans/American Indians, immigrants, and with AIDS or disability. Moreover, protections offered groups of scrutiny extend to classifications by gender and sex.
http://prezi.com/qsby2iyhdng5/equality-and-civil-rights-12/
Source References:
Janda, Kenneth, Jeffrey Berry, and Jerry Goldman. 2009. The Challenge of Democracy. Boston, MA: WadsworthCengage Learning.
Shea, Daniel, Joanne Green, and Christopher Smith. 2007. Living Democracy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Schmidt, Steffan, Mack Shelley, and Barabara Bardes. 2008. American Government and Politics Today. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Miroff, Bruce, Raymond Seidelman, and Todd Swanstrom. 2007. The Democratic Debate. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Gitelson, Alan, Robert L. Dudley, and Melvin Dubnick. 2008. American Government. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Dreslang, Dennis, James Gosling. 2008. Politics and Policy in American States and Communities. New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
Civil Liberties and Order #11
We are said to be ”in the land of the free”. Freedoms must be balanced against restrictions. So, what does it mean to balance the need for order against the need for liberty? The constitution in its form as approved by its writers did not give a Bill of Rights to promote protections for the people. Rather, the writers of the constitution believed that the delineation of powers given the new central government were enough to protect the citizenry from oppressive government. But, the states and the people felt different. Ultimately, a Bill of Rights emerged and the constitution was eventually ratified by a majority of states. Since then we, our government’s executive, legislative, and primarily the Court have been involved in seeking to fully interpret how to balance liberty and order. Civil liberty may be called a negative right or totality of rights assuring that a central power is kept from infringing on the liberty of the masses.
http://prezi.com/wfmihzinfhyw/liberties-and-order-11/
Source References:
Janda, Kenneth, Jeffrey Berry, and Jerry Goldman. 2009. The Challenge of Democracy. Boston, MA: WadsworthCengage Learning.
Shea, Daniel, Joanne Green, and Christopher Smith. 2007. Living Democracy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Schmidt, Steffan, Mack Shelley, and Barabara Bardes. 2008. American Government and Politics Today. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Miroff, Bruce, Raymond Seidelman, and Todd Swanstrom. 2007. The Democratic Debate. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Gitelson, Alan, Robert L. Dudley, and Melvin Dubnick. 2008. American Government. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Dreslang, Dennis, James Gosling. 2008. Politics and Policy in American States and Communities. New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
