Week 12 & 13: Terrorism

This week, you read about historical terrorism, and you've read about several different international terrorist organizations. I spent some time discussing the working definition of terrorism; now it's your turn to think about it.

For this week's discussion post, I want you to try to answer the following question: How do we categorize an organization as terrorist? (Note: please think from a GLOBAL perspective, and not just from the persepctive of a US citizen.) Is there a set group of characteristics? What separates terrorist from a revolutionary or freedom fighter? Who should make this determination? Should an organizations' philanthropic or political activity be taken into account?

Week 11 & 12: Revolutions

Taking into consideration the definition we have of what a revolution is, do you consider the Arab Spring, the 1989 "Revolutions", and the guerilla movements in Latin America to be revolutions? Using the criteria from the Week 10 video, and the other material we've discussed, tell me why or why not. If some are and others aren't, what makes them different?

Please use SPECIFIC EXAMPLES to back up your arguments from the sources, both readings and videos.

Week 9 & 10: Technology, War, and Development

This week, you've read and watched videos about a variety of technology. Technological and scientific advances have the potential to be both angel and devil; it's undeniable that technology often makes our lives better, but it also has the potential to be incredibly destructive. 

Using the videos and readings from this week, AND ANY from prior weeks (I encourage this), please answer the following questions: In your opinion, what was/were the biggest technological breakthrough(s) of the past century that we've discussed in this class? How did this improve or harm the quality of life (and for whom)? What do you see as the biggest potential advantages and pitfalls in technological development as globalization continues?

Please use SPECIFIC EXAMPLES to back up your arguments.

Week 7: A Polarized World

For this week, you are going to imagine yourself as a President/Prime Minister of a small, non-aligned FICTIONAL country in the 1960s during the Cold War. You can imagine your country to be within Southeast Asia, Africa, or Latin America - just make sure to tell me where. You've been caught between the US and the USSR, between liberal capitalism and communism, ever since the end of World War II. You've tried to stay neutral, but by now that just isn't an option anymore; you need a powerful ally.Which one will you chose - the US or the USSR? Remember, the political ideology comes with it!

Write this post as if you were writing a memo to the other members of your government explaining your choice. Why do you think this particular ally is the best? What evidence of their superiority have you seen in other countries? Considering the state of the world, post-World War II in the 1960s, what parts of their ideology appeal to you? What do you see as the biggest problems with the country that you chose NOT to ally with?

PLEASE try to think from a historical perspective - in the 1960s, it was still very much unclear whether communism or capitalism would ultimately prove to be the stronger, better ideology.

Week 5: The Cold War Begins

For this week, I want you to think about why, after WWII, the world divided into communist and capitalist factions. What rhetoric did the two sides use to explain their worldview? Although, on the surface, the difference was about competing economic ideas, what other considerations drove the two superpowers to oppose each other so strongly? Why didn't the international system intervene to smooth things over?

Week 5: Genocide & the Creation of the Human Rights Regime

You've read (and watched) survivor testimony from different genocides, you're learned about the founding of the UN, and the ideas behind having international human rights protection. Now I want you to answer ONE of the following TWO questions:

1) Using materials from both this week and last week (primary and secondary sources), to what extent do you think ordinary people, such as low ranking soldiers, should have been held accountable for the crimes that occurred during World War II, and WHY? Please use evidence from the readings to support your answer.
...OR...

2) Do you think the trials after WWII were a fair way to deal with the crimes of the war? Why or why not? Do you think that the idea of international intervention for human rights was executed well through the establishment of the UN, or do you think its creation was problematic, and WHY?

Week 4: World War II & the crisis of the New Racial Order

As you can see from your primary sources this week, racial pseudo-science and eugenics had a massive impact on the trajectory of World War II. Using primary sources from this week, with the secondary ones for context as needed, you're going to examine the ideas of race and the war.

Some things to think about are: What similarities and differences do you see between different countries' racial policies?  What historical events do you see as most influential in bringing public opinion behind these policies (please be specific)? In what ways do you see racial ideology influencing the decisions made during the war? In your opinion, were racial ideologies or political/military goals more of a driving factor behind World War II?