thoughts about session 8 (China w/Dr. Clayton)

During yesterday's seminar, I really appreciated hearing Clay's perspective on the Korean War as it applied to the People's Republic of China. Though Mao and Stalin did not like each other, I find it ironic that Mao's motivation for China to defend North Korea was similar to Stalin's motivation for the USSR to occupy Eastern Europe: a self-defense buffer zone. Regarding different perspectives, I also appreciated how the textbook emphasized that China and North Korea during the Korean War was fighting South Korea and THE UNITED NATIONS. Many educators, including myself(and even Clay yesterday) put emphasis on South Korea fighting alongside the United States during the Korean War, yet this shows NO GUILT on the part of educators like Clay and myself...the US, after all, contributed to over 90% of the UN forces in the Korean War.
When I teach about the Korean War in my history classes and Model UN activites, I will definitely place an emphasis on the role of the UN, in that conflict. Regarding America's role as a Super Power, I still make note that the US provided most troops during the Korean conflict and as well as during another UN police action, Operation Desert Storm/Gulf War I. While students need to know how America's role as a Super Power had shown during the Korean and Gulf conflicts, students, as well as the world in general, will have to see if another country on the UN Security Council will demonstrate its role as an upcoming, if not current, Super Power. That other country on the Security Council, of course, is China, and a test to China's Super Power role would involve potential UN actions over nuclear-armed Pakistan and North Korea which border China.

I was thinking about how to incorporate the article about how to tell the difference between friends and enemies into my classroom. Instead of just showing the kids the stereotypes drawn by Dr Seuss, now there is a reading to go along with it. I might also be able to link it up with an article from Nazi Germany about the similarities between the Jews and a rat. Could bring about an interesting class discussion about racism and in particular, racism in the U.S.

I agree with Anet about how interesting it is for one person to be able to control so many minds. My students always seem interested in that and "brainwashing" always seems to come up. The more interesting we make history to our students with stories about the public humiliation of landlords or the women dying because of the marriage law the more interested they become. Of course, you always have to have more stories like those to keep their interest tomorrow! Unfortunately, the text I use does not have any stories like those, so it is important (and interesting to me ,too) that I gather as many of these facts as I can for my class.

Learning about the motivation behind Mao and his policies will help provide insight for my classes next year when we discuss this topic. The information Prof. Dube provided about the reasoning and underlying causes helps flesh out and make real the subject matter. I agree with Annett about the inclusion of the landowner issues. Making a public example of people really helps with the “selling” of and buy-in to the communist ideas. It also makes it harder for people to stand up and dissent if they do not agree. The cult of personality that Mao was able to generate, even given the problems he was causing was impressive.

Yes, I too agree with Sally. In fact, as a Language Arts teacher I certainly capitalize on these visuals to teach the Persuasion unit to my students. It’s amazing how they can relate to the visuals and actually see the relevance with modern day society and realize that not much has changed.

One topic of discussion I found fascinating from Session 8 was the PRC’s focus on marriage. In order for marriages to be considered legal, they needed government sanction. This was yet another assertion of state power over formerly familial realm. I wonder what how many people were truly happy about being able to choose their own mates and not have their parents decide for them. In any place where a custom like arranged marriage becomes tradition, there must be some difficulty transitioning over to a new, more “progressive” practice. Although the idea that one should marry for “love” and not family status comes more natural to us Westerners, perhaps we really should consider the benefits of such an arrangement (everything is set up , you can learn to love the person???, etc). This may me a little off topic, but it calls to mind a conversation I often have with relatives of an older generation about the number of CHOICES we have in higher education in America and the west. My aunt use to attribute the idea of many American college student still undecided on their majors (consequently taking more time in undergraduate school) to the fact that we simply have too many choices here. She used to say, “In the Philippines, when you were encouraged to go into nursing, you went into nursing and you finished.” *insert stereotypical Filipino nurses joke here* When I heard this as a teenager, I use to roll my eyes and think, “yes, I get it, you want me to go into nursing”. But when I have these discussions as an adult, I see a bit more about what she means. Sometimes, with too many choices, one gets overwhelmed, has a hard time choosing, and may even end up making the wrong decision. Don’t get me wrong, I LOVE the choices we have in higher education here in America, but I do see her point, as a handful of my friends have fallen victim to this very notion. Back to China…..I went off on this tangent because I was just curious to see how the Chinese responded to such an official change to their traditional customs/practices. Finally, I also wonder who called it the “Divorce Law”. Was it the government’s official name for it or was it just a nickname given by the people? If the former, it’s interesting how that might’ve been some foreshadowing of the effects of the law.

I agree with Sally and Ron about how we can use this article in the classroom, especially about Racism in the U.S. through the decades. I, too, discuss and show images about the steroetypes drawn by Dr. Suess, the comparisons made by the Nazis of Jews to rats, and treatment and perceptions of the Irish in the mid-late 19th century America. It can also be used in the discussion about terrorism and the racial profiling that occurred immediately after 9/11. Same demeaning ideas, all masked by fear, just recylced and repeated throughout history.
edited by cbacon on 5/23/2011