Showing posts with label BetoH. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BetoH. Show all posts

Friday, December 9, 2016

Final persuasive paper: Millennial political involvement

Beto Hoyos
Dr. Brown
ENG 306
8 December 2016

Reaching out to millennials on the importance of voting and political involvement as could be found in Huff Post or Vice online, etc.

            As the country continues to adjust to the fact that Donald Trump will soon take the oath of office as our 45th President, we millennials need to remain steadfast in our involvement and not become discouraged with the political process simply because we didn’t get the result we wanted. Now is the time to become more involved than ever. Don’t let outside influences, like the media, social networks or friends impact your decisions, morals or feelings. Believing that elections are rigged and thinking that your vote doesn’t matter is a very dangerous and a very disheartening way to feel. We are in a very unique position to affect and shape the future of this country and very well the rest of the world, but it is up to us to be the change we want to see.
            With one of most unusual and most spectated elections behind us, millennials (anyone born after 1980) have no doubt harbored a sense of uncertainty and mistrust in the government as well as in the political system. Uncertainty is nothing new to this generation. Millennials are characterized in plenty of ways, and challenging and questioning the status quo is one of those characteristics. Just because we may get a response we don’t agree with from all sides, that doesn’t mean we don’t cast a vote at all. Democracy is not a spectator sport, and if we don’t become more involved and stay involved now, then when will we? We millennials hold our future, our children’s future and the future of this already great country in our hands.
            In 2016, millennials became as large and as coveted as baby boomers in the political system. At the beginning of 2016, the number of eligible millennials were nearly equal to those of baby boomers. In April 2016 there were an estimated 69.2 million millennials of voting age, weather registered or not, as opposed to baby boomers at 69.7 million (Fry). Both boomers and millennials made up about 31% of the electorate population in this past election, while generation x and the greatest generation make up about 25% and 12% (Fry). As other generations decrease and die out as time goes on, our generations numbers will increase and remain in high demand. It is up to us to be involved and make that difference.
            Not just millennials, but all Americans, with an emphasis on millennials need to understand how important it is to turn out and cast your vote. Don’t assume that we don’t keep this country going, because we do. According to number crunchers at mashable.com, 46.6% of the U.S voting population did not vote in 2016. You want to look on the bright side? Well, compared to the 1996 election where 49% of eligible voters didn’t participate, this elections numbers were better, but just barely (Lekach). So if it seems like we’re going in the wrong direction its because the people who did turn out in large numbers, had the biggest say in the process. Your vote is your voice within the political process and not casting a vote is the same as being silent when asked a question.
If you don’t participate, then you can’t complain.
            There’s no doubt that we millennials share a type of revolutionary spirit, especially when it comes to highlighting a major problem or bringing an urgent change to social issues. Millennials have been on the front lines when it comes to protests such as occupy wall street and the black lives matter movement. As a fellow millennial its refreshing and its thrilling to see such social involvement and its nice to see my generation care about others and their well being weather socially or economically. However, when it comes to voting there is still a general feeling among millennials is that their vote doesn’t matter, or that their vote is insignificant among a sea of millions of votes. We all need to take that same enthusiasm we feel when protesting something or someone and take it to the polling location and even campaign for your desired candidate. Being involved comes in different forms, so be open to different ways of involvement. There is also this sense of feeling that “someone who thinks like me will vote, so its ok if I don’t”, but voting is more than filling in some bubbles and sending it in. Voting gives you the right to speak up and voice your opinion on issues and to criticize those who were elected. If you participated in the whole election process, then you therefore have more of a right to participate in the criticism of things when you feel the need to. If you participate in the process, then you can participate is the criticizing, you can throw shade at a politician, you can be openly opinionated, but make sure you’re involved. Don’t add to the stereotype that says that millennials whine and complain about things.
Just because its on the internet doesn’t mean its true!
            Millennials are in such a unique position in life. We grew up and matured at the same time as the information age grew and matured. Now as millennials come of age, become young professionals and establish families, the internet and information age has become such a normal part of a millennials everyday life. Technology has touched nearly every aspect of a millennials life from entertainment to gathering news. Social media has certainly brought people together and reconnected old friends, and that’s all well and good, but another thing that social media has done is decrease the trust people have towards the media. Another thing social media has done, especially during the past election, is separate the audience and pinned people against each other. This previous election forced people to pick a side. Fake news or sites known for being “click bate” have certainly flooded Facebook feeds in recent years and that seriously adds to the problem. Social media sites like Facebook are aware that this is of major concern to its users and its of major concern for the site as well. Fake news not only lessens the credibility people have towards Facebook as a credible site to gather info, but fake news can also very much affect the company’s bottom line and well standing on wall street.
            As millennials who grew up with the internet being such a normal thing, we’ve heard it all before and we know that we can’t trust everything we see on the internet. The issue of fake news on social media sites is of increasing concern because today about 62% of U.S adults turn to social media for their news (Woolf). We need to be able to distinguish between credible and reliable and what is not. There has even been growing concern over fake news from President Obama who this past November questioned the authenticity of these articles. Obama said in an interview with the New Yorker that “If we can’t discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda then we have problems”. Obama even went on to describe the new landscape of online news as a place where everything is true and nothing is true (Woolf). Millennials are the generation that blends social awareness with just enough anti establishment and curious nature to remain unrelenting when questioning sources or questioning authority. So let’s remember to questions the source and the reliability of stories.
Influence yourself.
            The 2016 election certainly had its share of opinionated individuals who were not afraid to show support for their favorite candidate. One thing we all must remember is that at the end of the day elections are personal. We must not take elections so lightly from here on out. These are choices which are going to affect our lives weather we realize it at the time of voting or not. Next election we’ll all be older and more mature with different life situations happening so form the same strong opinions you have towards anything else in life. Just because your favorite singer endorses Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton doesn’t mean you have to, especially if you don’t agree with their politics. Just follow your heart, that’s what I always do.
            Influences come in all forms and shapes and sizes. Just like our tastes in music, fashion and recreation have grown and changed, so to will our opinions. Forming different opinions than your parents is not a bad thing, and it doesn’t mean you’re turning your back on your family. On the contrary, it means that your family has molded you to be different, stand apart and form your own opinions. We also need to take the millennial qualities we millennials share, like being opinionated, fearless and unrelenting and use that when it comes to being involved in the political process. Influence yourself, don’t play yourself.
Thanks for listening to a fellow millennial,
Sincerely,
Beto Hoyos
Word count: 1470 (letter)

Let me explain!
            As we learned through out this semester, protest rhetoric is found in every aspect of communicating a desired topic to a certain audience. An open letter has all the makings and all the technical makings of a protest. I begin the conversation by relating to my audience, since we’re the same generation, I explain how I too feel a similar way that most of my audience may feel. I am not writing this letter to try and scold someone, but rather I’m writing it to inform and to emphasize the importance of political involvement and the importance of voting.
            In this paper I mention the effect that social networks and mass media has had on the voter population, and in class we learned that media can have a huge impact on an audience. In the Deluca and Peeples readings we learned how violence has been influenced by mass media. We may not necessarily relate an uproar in unrest and violence to the media because for so long we’ve thought about the media and news as a journalistic entity that is there to inform and protect us. When it comes to living in this ever evolving age of instant information, we have to be critical of the info we’re receiving.
            When I talk about this election and how much division it created and when I mention that I know the feeling, I’m relating to the audience and trying to appeal to their emotional side, using that pathos approach. Millennials are not stereotypes and are not a monolith and we can’t become discouraged with fellow Americans and fellow millennials. We need to remember that protesting is healthy, that debating one another is healthy, but most importantly being politically involved in healthy and expected. After all, it is our right as Americans.
            When I try and put myself into a situation, or when I use my own experiences to bring an issue to the forefront or to try and appeal to an audience I’m trying to appeal to the audience ethos. I too have felt that my vote may not necessarily matter, but I understand the importance of continuous political involvement. If we all don’t remain steadfast in our involvement, we can’t complain when things don’t go our way or vice versa.
            When I give the reader some numbers and info to look at, it uses logos to add credibility to the subject and gives the reader some facts and gives the thinkers food for thought. Numbers and stats not only add credibility to what I’m trying to convey, it also allows my point of importance to become more valid. A reader may see that more than half of the voting population did not vote in this previous election and that may open the minds of those who were not aware of that before.
           
                                                            Works Cited

            Fry, Richard. "Millennials Match Baby Boomers as Largest Generation in U.S Electorate." Fact Tank. News in the Numbers., 16 May 2016. Web. 7 Dec. 2016
            Lekach, Sasha. "Nearly Half of Americans Didn't Vote, Not Even for Harambe." Mashable. N.p., 9 Nov. 2016. Web. 7 Dec. 2016.

            Woolf, Nicky. "Obama Is Worried about Fake News on Social Media." The Guardian. N.p., 20 Nov. 2016. Web. 7 Dec. 2016.

Monday, December 5, 2016

Audience description: Involvement in political process


My final persuasive paper my target audience ideally would be a younger audience from my generation and on down who seem to have harbored mistrust in the government and in the political process.


1. The type of demographic I would try to appeal to would be the youth who do not get involved in things such as voting or even educating themselves on issues facing their own community. Many young people are unified in  that they have lost trust in the political process and in the government. Much of today's youth feels like they don't even have a voice when it comes to things such as elections, weather general or state. In this previous election, 46% of registered voters did not vote! If we don't participate we can't be complaining. That may have made a difference, but people don't see that. As Americans we have the right to vote and to use our voices and run for office and make a change for the better. The young people in today's society have the potential to change the world, we all need to get involved, stay involved and get educated.

2. Come up with one specific, representative detail about your imagined reader that helps you understand who they are concretely. i.e. background, education, culture, etc.

It's not just the youth in America that could be reached through this persuasion, but also anybody who says things like "oh, its better if i just don't vote" or things like "I don't like either candidates so i didn't vote". This general audience would consist of anyone from high school students, college students, college graduates, young professionals, and really anyone with a strong opinion on something. Imagine a highly intelligent college kid who always engages in smart conversations that are challenging and you insightful, but then you mention politics and they say something like "oh i don't get involved with all that", well someone who's learning and figuring out their place in life is the person who should be involved in the political process.

3. List the principles relevant to your issue that you and this person probably share

Like many, I'm tired of seeing the same old faces and the same old policies being passed and implemented. However, i have seen changes in things and laws which give me hope that the country and society is moving along, no matter how slow. I feel that we as fortunate Americans who can go to college and learn about different things, and learn history, we have the power to prevent unfortunate events from reoccurring. We have to be involved and we have to go out and vote. If you don't like whats going on in your community, attend a city council meeting and address it. Times are changing and i, like many of my generation, feel like policies and people in power need to change as well.

4. List the principles relevant to your issue that you and this person probably do not share


I     I've always been a very respectful person, but if i don't agree with something someone or a politician is saying or trying to implement or put into law i will make it public, i will not hide it and i won't hesitate to express my displeasure with the person or with the issue. There are plenty of people my age that i've encountered who feel like they need to be super respectful to a person in a high position. Also we may disagree on where criticism and patriotism can't co-exist. Some may see criticism on the country or the political process or the government or the president as un-American, but i happen to feel like its healthy and should be encouraged. 

      5.  Do any of the principles in 4 represent insurmountable obstacles to them accepting your argument?
      
       No i don't believe so, I feel like the approach would be the way to get people to listen. I'm not here to scold people or tell them how to live their lives, however i am here to try and encourage people and to show people how important it is to get involved and go vote. Also we are as a country fortunate to be able to go out and campaign and be involved and run for office. 

     6. Where will you and this reader find common ground?
     
       Well, we're all in this together, we're facing similar challenges and we want to feel like our voices heard and we do want our voices heard. Its up to us to unite no matter how different we may see things or what we may believe in. 

    7. 
d    





Research: Delano Grape Strike

Beto Hoyos
11/28/16
ENG 306
Research paper
                                                            Delano Grape Strike
            On September 8th 1965 the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee (AWOC), a largely Filipino and Mexican farm workers group, walked out of the grape fields in protest of years of low wages and poor working conditions. That walk out was the beginning of the Delano Grape Strike. Eight days later, Cesar Chavez the leader of the National Farm Workers (NFW) would join the strike. From that point on Chavez would embark on a lifelong crusade against poor working conditions on behalf of farm workers across the country. Everything Chavez did from that point still resonates today.
            The need for foreign farm laborers increased as the U.S entered World War II and the labor shortage affected the nations agricultural production. During the summer of 1942 the U.S and Mexico signed an agreement that allowed temporary workers to cross the border into the U.S during harvest seasons and then return to Mexico once the harvest was over. That agreement became known as the Bracero program (Bruns). After politicians faced years of pressure from a growing civil rights movement, the program was dismantled in 1964. However, by 1965 no real improvement was made and farm workers had not yet been able to unionize and were still making .90 cents an hour plus ten cents for every lug they collected (ufw.org).
            Chavez worked for ten years as an organizer for the Community Service Organization (CSO) before resigning in 1962. Chavez left the organization after CSO leaders resisted the push for labor unions (Jenson pp.12). Chavez and his family moved to Delano, California where he along with Dolores Huerta established the UFW. In September of 1962 the first convention of the UFW is convened in Fresno, California and the iconic eagle flag is revealed. Chavez worked tirelessly for three years and traveled town to town across the central California valley building up his organization that would eventually become an effective union.
            Chavez famously said that once social change is established, it cannot be reversed (Perez, Parlee). That mindset carried Chavez and the UFW through a successful year of grape boycotts across the state. In 1965 the AWOC led a walkout of hundreds of farm workers in the Coachella valley and soon after that farm workers in Delano would join the strike. In the spring of 1966 the UFW along with the AWOC called upon the public to refrain from buying grapes without a union label (ufw.org). Soon after the two groups would join forces to become the UFWA. Chavez believed that the union could influence growers through economic pressure (Jensen pp.7). The boycotts put a lot of pressure on the two biggest growers in the area, Schenley and DiGiorgio. The boycott had the potential to affect sales and also damage relations with other workers. The grape strike was originally set in motion in order to make people outside the agriculture industry aware of the poor conditions the workers have gone through.
            In 1966, Chavez along with his supporters began a 300-mile march to Sacramento from Delano. Chavez wanted to nationally publicize their plight and he wanted to bring widespread attention to the cause, or La Causa. The march had such a lasting impact because it blended the Spanish traditions of religious pilgrimages and contemporary demonstrations (Jenson pp.15). The march to Sacramento had strong religious and cultural overtones. Chavez also saw the action as a pilgrimage for minorities who had suffered in hostile environments in which they were expected to work in (Jenson pp.16). Chavez was a deeply spiritual person who believed that this march would put him and his supporters at peace with the Lord (Jenson pp.17). Chavez paid attention to spiritual and political details and he wanted to ensure his supporters were marching for the people and for the cause and not out of revenge and anger. The march reached the end when Chavez and his supporters arrived at the capitol building on Easter morning and he announced to a crowd of 10,000 people that Schenley had given in and signed an agreement with the UFWA (ufw.org).
            After the the march, more growers came to terms with the UFWA and DiGiorgio would soon sign an agreement as well. The boycotts were working and Chavez witnessed first hand the power of people coming together to make a change. In 1967, another major grape grower in the state, Gallo vineyards, joined Chavez’s union. However, in 1970 Gallo went against Chavez and signed a new four-year contract with the Teamsters union. Chavez retaliated by calling for a boycott and strike on all Gallo wines. In the 1970s, Gallo produced 45% of California’s wine and 37% of the country’s wine (Bruns pp.102). In February 1975, several members of the UFWA began a 110-mile march from San Francisco to Modesto, California where Gallo’s headquarters was located (Bruns pp.104). By the time the march reached Modesto, 15,000 protestors had joined on the walk and again a march led by Chavez had gained national attention. By June 1975, then California Gov., Jerry Brown signed into law the Agricultural Labor Relations Act, the first kind of legislation protecting farm workers and providing for collective bargaining (Bruns pp.105). By 1978 the boycotts of grapes, Gallo wineries and even lettuce are officially ended after the UFWA and the Teamsters union reach an agreement allowing the UFWA to represent farm workers.
            In the following years, Chavez and his supporters took part in nonviolent protests on behalf of different causes. Chavez and other UFWA leaders felt that a non-violent approach was the most effective and could have the longest lasting results. One non-violent act of protest that Chavez found personally and publically effective was fasting. Chavez fasted on three separate occasions through out his life and did so in personal and spiritual penance. Chavez thought of the fasts as a purification of his mind, body and soul (ufw.org). The first time Chavez fasted was in 1968 when he went on a 25 day, water only fast in protest and spiritual penance on behalf of farm working men, women and even children affected by years of poor treatment (ufw.org). Chavez would take on another fast in 1972 which lasted 24 days in protests of similar issues affecting farm workers and their families (Alarcon). Even into his late 60s, Chavez would continue to fast. In 1988, while protesting the use of pesticides on table grapes, Chavez would fast one last time at the age of 67.
            Everything Chavez put in place through out his life still resonates loudly today. Establishment of the UFWA led to better lives for farm workers. That includes better pay, better working environments and even education. Even after Chavez’s death in 1993, the UFWA continued to improve the way farm workers live and work. In 1989 the UFWA established the first and only pension plan for retired farm workers, the Juan de la Cruz pension plan. The UFWA also fought to stop the use of dangerous pesticides and to have farm workers tested on a regular basis to check for pesticide exposure. Today, the UFWA truly embodies the spirit of Cesar Chavez. UFWA leaders continue to work and protest on behalf of farm workers everywhere, the way Chavez did, without fear, because you cannot oppress those who are not afraid anymore.
           


                                                Annotated Bibliography
Bruns, Roger. “The Encyclopedia of Cesar Chavez: the farm workers’ fight for rights and justice”. Santa Barbara, California. Greenwood publishing. 2013. Ebook
This book shows an extensive look at the life of Chavez and also looks at the life of the United Farm Workers of America organization and how it began. Bruns, along with other contributors, take us through the life and times of Chavez and at the beginning of the book you learn that Chavez had a difficult time getting started with his organization and getting followers.
On page 268 the book talks about his early years in the organization and how it was hard for Chavez to understand why people join causes. In those early years he learned how to uplift his people and help them instead of using his people to better his personal life.

Jenson, Richard, Hammerback, John, Chavez, Cesar. “The Words of Cesar Chavez”. Texas A&M Press. 2002. Ebook. UA Library.
A compilation of notes and stories from Chavez’s early life and rhetorical career. The book examines Chavez’s desires to organize, unionize and fight for fair treatment. The book also examines the manner in which Chavez would go about protesting, such as fasting.

Chavez, Cesar. “Speech at Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Washington in 1989”. United Farm Workers of America. Ufw.org. 1989. Speech.
More than 20 years after Chavez began his crusade for fair working conditions he continued to educate people on the evolving issues in the farm workers world. In 1989 a now elderly Chavez, warns the crowd at the Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma about pesticides being used on grapes around the west coast but especially in California. He tells a story about a boy who died from cancer after being exposed to the chemicals and pesticides which were being used around him and his family in the McFarland area. In that area 13 boys were diagnosed with cancer during the 1980s, during a time when the towns population was only 6000 people. Chavez goes on to say that at the time there was no evidence to conclude that pesticides were the actual cause of cancer in these children however.

Araiza, Lauren. “To March for Others: The black freedom struggle and the United Farm Workers”. Philadelphia, Penn., University of Pennsylvania Press. 2014. Ebook
What Araiza writes about in chapter 2 of the book is about how different groups of the time came together to form stronger bonds and to gain more of a voice within society. NFWA worked with other organizations like SNCC because they shared similar conflicts and both groups understood the racial disparities they both shared. However, as the 60s began to move along groups like the SNCC began to see conflicts rise within their own group. SNCC were responsible for forming white allies and bringing middle class white young people to Mississippi to help register rural and inner city people to vote. Some within the group did not like the idea of white allies, they felt they could not totally relate to the struggle. Regardless, the SNCC California chapter remained focused on economic inequalities rather than racial inequalities like they were doing in the south. SNCC was crucial in helping NFWA in continuing their protests and doing them in a nonviolent manner.

Alarcon, Evelina. “Cesar Chavez: A legacy for peace, justice and non-violence”. New York, NY. Long View publishing. C2003. Peoplesworld.org. online publication.
I like this article because it gives you more of an insight as to how Cesar Chavez was and how he wanted to take on his causes and do so in a non violent manner. Chavez was famous for taking stands and being firm in his actions. Chavez once did a 25 day fast to send a message to farm workers who had mentioned the rise in violent assaults by farm owners. Chavez saw non violence as a winning strategy and said “violence just hurts those who are already hurt”. Here you see the impact other peaceful leaders of the world had on Chavez. He’s said he was inspired by the work of Ghandi and also really admired Dr. Martin Luther King. The two leaders never worked together but they both admired what each other was doing. King once said that their efforts were one and the same, and Dr. Kings wife, Coretta Scott King, visited Chavez while he was once jailed for violated a boycott injunction.

Levy, Jacqueline. Ross, Fred Jr. “Cesar Chavez: the autobiography of La Causa”. Minnesota. University of Minnesota press. 2007.
In 1965 Chavez had already established his life and family and they were all already experienced farm workers but Chavez knew things were not what they should be. The conditions were poor and the work was long and dangerous at times. Grape pickers were paid an average of 90 cents an hour but would work ridiculously long hours and lived in poor conditions.


UFW.org. “United Farm Workers of America”. “Story of Cesar Chavez”. National headquarters Keene, California. Press inquires Bakersfield, California.
With a rich history and an abundant, detailed history, the united farm workers of America website is a perfect home for unknown or unanswered questions about the leader himself or about the situations surrounding the grape strike or other related events that followed.

Orosco, Jose-Antonio. “Toppling the Melting pot: Immigration and multiculturalism in America”. Bloomington. Indiana University Press. 2016.
What the author describes when talking about Cesar Chavez is how he felt about immigration and what he thought the Mexican immigrants can bring to the country. He felt that immigrants could impact the country positively.

Richard Ray Perez & Lorena Parlee. “Cesar’s Last Fast”. Monkey Mind Media. Film. Netflix. 2014.
The film depicting Cesar Chavez’s final fast in protest of pesticide use and personal penance for the families affected by pesticides. Chavez was known for his non-violent approach to protesting and this one was more memorable because he decided to do so it an elderly age. The film was released after the death of both directors but dedicated to the two directors and all those Chavez helped.