Immigration, Economic Theory, a Welcoming Beacon

Here's a topic that's been beaten to the ground countless times and yet it still manages to stand up in the face of American controversy: immigration. I'm not going to talk about immigration from a conservative or liberal vantage point--I simply want to discuss using economic theory, the rationale for President Bush's guest worker program proposed in 2003. Most important to note in this context is that while many believe granting amnesty or providing a guest worker program to workers who have broken the law is immoral--rewarding lawbreakers for their actions--the fact remains that this illegal activity would continue anyways. Putting a program in place does not promote illegal immigration, it simply brings the issue that would be occurring anyway directly into the headlines of America's media by codifying the issue through legislation. Put more simply, it takes a problem that will occur without the law, and provides legislation that will serve as a pragmatic, temporary solution.

The proposed guest worker program between the United States and Mexico is simple: the 8 to 20 million undocumented Mexican workers will have a chance to declare working rights, by laboring in American industries with the protection of American labor laws. This means that the many employers who currently pay workers under the table and evade American tax laws will now have to pay workers the standardized minimum wage. In short, undocumented workers, employers, and the government all stand as beneficiaries. Companies like Walmart who hire large numbers of undocumented workers nation wide will now be able to avoid hefty lawsuits concerning illegal labor. The guest worker program, thought highly of by Mexican president Fox, is a three year program, where workers' visas allow them to travel freely between borders during the three years until expiration. Visas can then be renewed after the third year, and workers in the program receive no special treatment regarding citizenship; their path is not expedited, as they must follow the same laws and protocol as Mexicans pursuing citizenship legally. After the third year, the United States government provides credit incentives to Mexican workers to return home, hoping that the undocumented workers will not return to hiding in the shadows of American society. Most important to note about the program is that employers may only hire undocumented Mexican workers if it has been proven that no American worker has been found to willingly fill the position.

What's the problem?

The major concern with the program is that Mexican workers will be taking American jobs. It's a little known fact that in certain American industries--chiefly the agricultural sector--are suffering from a severe labor supply deficit. Put simply: American workers are not willing to take many of the tedious manual labor jobs that so importantly make up America's breadbasket. If American workers aren't willing to take the jobs, as has been proven by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, then why not allow the undocumented workers (who are laboring here anyway), to become documented and counted as a part of America's labor force, and help in the industries that need the supply of labor so badly?

The economic theory comes into play in two ways--from two separate scenarios. The first being a situation where there is a severe labor deficit in industries, and American workers can not be found to fill positions. In this case, the labor shortage indicates that a normal firm would want to raise wages to induce people to work. With the implementation of this program, Mexican workers who before had worked for lower than the minimum wage, will now be drawn to work for the minimum wage in other industries--saving costs for the firm as they will not have to provide lofty compensation. The second case is that of where American workers actually are trying to fill the positions and Mexicans are being hired instead. The fact of the matter is that any competitive, profit maximizing firm will be looking to hire the most productive workers at the lowest costs. With this program, employers can no longer pay below the minimum wage, therefore the difference in wage between American workers and Mexican workers is zero. Why then choose Mexican labor? Well here is where Americans have to finally tuck away their ego and accept the fact that some Mexican workers are coming here to support a family, and are motivated, hard-working, and more productive than their respective American competition. So if the Mexicans are more productive manual laborers, why not let them do the jobs that Americans are unwilling to take, and in turn stimulate the American economy?

Again, this is all economic theory, and in practice the program may err in some ways. But what I think is the most important thing to note about this heated controversy concerning border control and immigration is that America from its nativity has been seen as a beacon of freedom and democracy with its convivial attitude toward immigrants. It was the Irish, Italian, Chinese, Polish, and Russian immigrants who built the skeleton of our country, from railroads to bridges to cities--and as each of these groups emigrated from their homeland they found the same discrimination held against them as Mexicans are experiencing now. I think the best way to summarize America and what it stands for, as far as legal immigration, is a profound and poignant inscription found on the base of Lady Liberty.

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door."

My new undertakings

Well dear friends after a brief, semester-long hiatus, I am back. Thanks for waiting. I haven't yet the energy nor the creative capacity to entirely catch you up to speed on the many changes I've incurred since the end of last semester, so instead I'll provide a brief summary.

(If you've read anything I've written in the 3 months or so preceding the end of the fall semester at Scranton, you may be curious as to the answer of my seemingly enduring question--yes, I did get into Cornell and that is where I've been the past five months).

Hmm, brevity...Okay I was nervous upon my arrival--typical anxiety--about meeting people, classes, etc. etc.. Then what? Well I suppose the most simple explanation and analysis of the first month or so would be to say that I most certainly lucked out. Skeptical at first about rooming with a somewhat non-native speaker, I soon found that the floor that I lived on was full of some of the most amazing, welcoming, interesting...I'd continue the fanfare of adjectives but as to not offend, I cease...

How were classes? Certainly enlivening, challenging, and pretty much exactly what I expected. I can't say that I found myself utterly bewildered on a daily basis, but there were times and places. My course of study focuses foremost on the relationship between employers and employees, labor laws, practices, management, and to all non-ILR students, it seems to be the most ambiguous and somewhat obscure major. My explanation to all is: "I'll end up in a field where it is my job to make sure that you are happy at work." That seems to be good enough--though such a terse description somewhat belies ILR's claim that it constitutes one of the most important and efficacious movements for labor and social progress--which by all means it does. What do I want to do with it? Well a rather outstanding majority, perhaps upwards of 90 percent of ILR grads at Cornell go on to Law school. It's a consideration. To be entirely honest I am truly unsure of what career field I plan to pursue, which is why I will play it by ear, seek opportunity and carpe diem etc... I suppose I still have some time--though if this semester's unusual hastiness is at all indicative of how fast the next two years will fly, then I suppose I better start thinking harder. Up to this point at least I feel as if I've been on a pretty successful path and I see no reason to carry on in any other manner than I have been thus far.

Well there it is, one semester at Cornell down; I've learned a great deal and I look forward to returning in the fall. As for this summer--well my goal is to be the prince of frugality. This summer will be a good way to amend my pecuniary difficulties, as I will scrimp and save and hope to be somewhat more wise with my earnings. I'd leave with something more poignant but, as I said, I would be brief: cheers.

Proving the Existence of God? A Fun Exercise in Logic

I was thinking back to my philosophy class last year--introductory (Socrates, St. Thomas Aquinas) etc--and I was compelled to add a flash of logical insight here. I was at mass the other night, third Sunday in advent, and the pastor gave an inspiring homily regarding gifts from God that all people have and how it relates to final exams and the Christmas season. I then remembered the discussion we had about God in philosophy class, and some casual conversations with friends about our differing beliefs. Now what I am about to do can not be construed as an assured sign of God's existence, but I think it is fun anyways. Proving that God exists is not humanly possible, but I think this method of basic logic and syllogism presents a pretty decent argument. Okay, here we go.

It is our natural human understanding in which nothing great can be thought exists. In other words, humans can conceive, in their minds, the existence of an ultimately powerful being. Now the question is: is God that which nothing greater than can be thought? In order to understand this we must look at the traditional western concept of God--as a creator. Everything in the world has been created by something, meaning that their must be an ultimate creator which brought something into existence out of nothing. A creator brings existence into being, has power over all being, is unlimited, infinite, unique, immaterial, transcendent, all powerful, and perfect. To be perfect means to have all perfections, and therefore is all good. A good is something which is better to have than not to. It is better to exist than not to. Therefore, God exists.

Take what you want from that--just a fun exercise of logic...

Liberty, Through and Through

"The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots..." - Thomas Jefferson

I'd like to refer back to a previous writing--the one discussing the Western Way of War. Earlier in the semester I read an enthralling historical reconstruction of Greek warfare. I analyzed the style of fighting in my composition, discussing the reality of the battlefield. Looking back, I have found one glaring omission. Western armies fought not for their land or livelihood, but for an idea: that "no man become inferior to, or give way, before another." - Themistocles.

Traditionally, western armies have shed their blood on behalf of liberty and freedom. The United States, from its revolutionary origins, is no exception. George Washington crossed the Delaware on Christmas night, 1776, not for territorial aggrandizement or colonial imperialism, not for upholding the sanctity of a crown or the tradition of duty to country, but rather to ensure that no man is deprived of the natural, unalienable right: liberty.

In World War II, Americans served as a buttress, upholding the principles on which peace and prosperity flourished throughout the world. Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were resolved to abridge Nazi Tyranny, and restore self-government to those who had been forcibly deprived. People often compare Pearl Harbor to 9-11. Only three days ago, we celebrated the day in which our country was brought together--in an attack against our founding principles. Americans rose to the occasion, and sought vengeance for the threat to our liberty.

Today, the United States military again provides a service to grant liberty to those with none, and to avenge the terror which threatened our personal security and freedom on September 11. I read a button on a classmate's bookbag recently that said "No blood for oil." I thought to myself for a moment, realizing 'wait, wait...that's all wrong.' We aren't shedding blood in the middle east solely for oil. Americans today fail to recognize the foremost goal sought in this war. It's a vice--Americans tend to be far too materialistic--concerned primarily with what we may get our hands on... But Americans have never won a war because of their aspiration for material advancement, and it remains so today. We must look introspectively at American rectitude. Americans are fighting so that no enemy will come and push us around on our own turf. We fight as a bastion of liberty; we fight for the idea that no man must give way before another, against an enemy who avows that the purpose of their life is to die fighting a holy war--in the footsteps of Mohammad.

What happened to that great pride in the American soldier and the American cause? I might suggest to you that my generation has been raised with strong anti-Vietnam sentiments, lingering into today's society and indicative of our strong aversion to aggression in the Middle East. Hopefully our society will soon open their eyes, and see the world the way the Greatest Generation did during Hitler's tyranny--or the way Thomas Paine saw it and wrote about the freedom that could only be attained by the bloodshed of patriots. We do not exchange blood for oil, we exchange blood for freedom and justice in order to render a longstanding peace in the world.

"What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly...it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as Freedom should not be highly regarded." - Thomas Paine

I'll keep this one short. If you have never been camping in the northeast in December (by camping I mean really roughing it --tents, sleeping bags, 10 degree weather minus wind chill etc..), you are probably smart. However, that was probably the most fun that I've had this semester. My friends and I spend just one night (two would have probably killed us) in the Pocono's, and it was quite the adventure. I'm less wont to complain about those uncomfortable sleeping arrangments here in my dorm. Though I grew an appreciation for nature (the stars, the trees, few animals, a campfire, snowdrifts, etc), I really am a man of civilization. Going back into a heated building after one night in the woods felt, I assumed at the time, a bit like heaven. Hopefully we'll do that again sometime though.

It's Christmas Time Again, Charlie Brown

Well Thanksgiving was just what I needed--though it was somewhat of a tease for Christmas. I quit my job at the mall, started my job on campus, and have sort of retaken the reins of my life. I have a grasp on my workload and my mindset is a bit clearer coming in to the last few weeks of the semester.

Upcoming plans: My friends and I have planned a camping trip: the outdoors (real men) type in the Pocono's. We'll only be going for one night (as to not suffer too serious of cold-weather injuries...) but it will be a good way to mentally prepare for finals.

Any other big news... not really. I hope to hear from Cornell in the next couple weeks or so--trying very hard not to think about it much. I'm quite excited for Christmas this year--more so even than I've been in a while--at least as far as getting into the Christmas spirit early goes. I usually have the mindset that Christmas has become another institution of social commercialism, just a money-making ploy for retailers and other such industry. I'm trying very hard this advent season not to lose sight of the true meaning that has so become so deeply muddled in the black Friday mega-sales. I like to think about that Charlie Brown Christmas special, where Linus realizes that his friends, especially Charlie, have lost sight of the true meaning of Christmas. Just read Luke, chapter 2 and you'll remember what I'm talking about. "And that, Charlie Brown, is what Christmas is all about." Anyway, aside from that, I really have gotten into the Christmas spirit. Normally I think that playing Christmas music the week before Thanksgiving is somewhat excessive--but because I am away at school, I will only be home a few days before Christmas, which isn't quite long enough to get in the spirit. So I'll go with the flow this year and turn on the radio station that only plays Christmas music--why not?

Growing Pains?

Life was much simpler as a child. Sometimes I think that growing up isn't all that it is cracked up to be - being grown up might be- but the process of getting there isn't. As a ten year old I would look at a twenty year old and think about how they are all grown up and all the insecurities of youth have dissipated by then...and now I am almost twenty and I wonder when those insecurities really will dissipate. I've been starting to realize a lot lately though...at least about the "coming of age" process. I think the biggest thing that has been a concern of mine is finding out who I really am- not an easy thing to do. I often feel that people my age have a good sense of who they are though I wonder whether sometimes it's just a show or some way of conforming to our society - molding into who people think that they should be. This year has been pretty intense for me as far as maturing is concerned.

I tend to think a lot about all of this and finally something hit me. The best way to find out who you are is to find out who you are not. In my case, I have found out who I am not in more ways than I can even think of. I think sometimes you have to play for the wrong team in order to find out that it is in fact the wrong team. For instance - those goals I had as a child (professional baseball) are realistically unattainable. On a higher level, I've found out after a thorough soul-searching that I'm not supposed to be in the Army. I've made decisions on what I don't like to study (and some on what I do) and it keeps leading me to one pertinent question: If these are what I am not, then what am I...or who am I? I suppose I'm not quite at a point where I can answer that but my biggest concern is when will I finally know?

It's possible that I worry too much about this stuff - and most likely I don't have a lot of control over any of it. Still I'd like to be free of many of the concerns that I still have. It's funny- I was talking to my friend about all of this the other day, and we were discussing how as kids we couldn't grow up fast enough. I couldn't wait for the time when I'd have everything all settled down and I'd be sure of what I am supposed to do with my life. Now I wish I could skip the whole process of growing (but I think that the process is probably what makes someone who they are in the first place). Having these concerns I often question the importance of smaller things: like learning the date of the second Persian war, or learning who invented Cognative Learning, or that the United States has 88,000 local governments. Maybe they are important though in a different way, and like many things, maybe I haven't quite figure them out yet. For right now, I like to think of it with that old (but meaningful) cliche: "Everything happens for a reason."

Over the Hump

Well I am past the semester's midpoint and an inundation of anxious feelings have all the suddenly hit me. I don't remember the last time that my work has piled up so incessantly and surprisingly I've been pretty diligent. I think that I have read more books (many of which were long-winded and some I barely understood) in the past three weeks than I have ever read in my entire life. Most of them are for class and I have enjoyed them mostly. Some though I choose just for leisure (if you can really call reading Charles Dickens leisure - sometimes I think it's a chore). Reading about the Ancient Greeks has only stimulated my intellectual curiosity so much and I am certainly ready to move on. I am moving on. We're reading now about Winston Churchill in a history class of mine - mainly about his deliberate actions taken in May of 1940 but we also read about his brilliance as a writer/historian. Somewhat inspirational at least to me in regards to writing (I've tried to master some techniques). I've also written more papers in the past few weeks but I can't complain too much because it's helped me hone my skills.

I think finally the work has hit me so much that I'm feeling a little insecure - especially now that I have a job. Amazing how money can disappear so quickly but now I finally have some employment at least to supplement my checking account until Christmas. I can't exactly critique my job too much because I've only worked one day up until this point - 9 Nov- though it seems different than I expected. It's low paying (lower than New York State's minimum wage) and since it's holiday employment I am working during the busiest time of year. It'll be nice to earn some money but in some regards it's an added stress. I think I'd rather work on campus... Having a job will put some more pressure on my studies. I was certainly busy enough and able to be quite assiduous with few extracurriculars. Now with twelve or more hours a week dedicated to retail sales I may find that I have to organize my time a bit more efficiently. I worry that my grades will suffer yet I maintain my confidence because in past I've been relatively successful with a loaded schedule.

At best I can say that I've been fairly motivated of late. I'm surprised that I haven't fallen into the "funk" that I expected myself to, and am hoping that whatever it is inside me that continues to plug away will remain for a little while longer (at least until Thanksgiving where I can reorganize my thoughts). I haven't been overly-motivated - that is to say I am not jumping with zeal at all times anxiously awaiting my next homework assignments or a two mile run on a treadmill. But the fact that I have been doing these things at this point in the semester is at least saying enough. Of course on top of all this I still haven't the faintest of ideas as to where I will be come January (and worst of all I won't know until late December). I've sort of stopped worrying though.

I'm looking forward to Thanksgiving. It's been a very long time since I have seen my extended family and it will be wonderful to catch up on how college is for my cousins, and how my grandfather's stocks are, and how my little cousins are getting smarter and smarter, and who is dating who... I could go on. I'm also looking forward to the actual break from being here. I find that it is very easy to get caught up in school so much that it becomes very hard to prioritize. Getting out of the college setting for a few days will be a great way to get the outside view of my life and put things into their proper scope. In a lot of ways I feel like I have a lot bottled up and won't be able to get it out until Thanksgiving. I'm sure I'm not alone in these sentiments-most students feel the same way. Thanksgiving is only a few weeks away. Until then, I must press on.

Less is More

Violence in Society and Entertainment
Here is a stark contrast: Americans today without a doubt have a desensitized view on violence and sex strictly from our entertainment cohort, however, our society today is much less violent than that of say the Ancient Greeks. Sounds a bit confusing perhaps. Well in order to argue this effectively I need some backup. Let's start with Ancient Greek society. If you'd like to know how the Greeks fought you can read my earlier entry, but that isn't exactly what I am talking about here.

Greeks lived in a world where the every day citizen's farm was threatened annually. It could be anticipated that a neighboring city-state would execute an aggressive act against their adjoining Greek town. However abysmal it may have been, it was the Greek way of life, and they lived with it. Annual violence was as common as the annual harvest. Paradoxically, the Greek entertainment of this time period, namely plays, never showed such violence. Greek plays such as Aeschylus' Oresteian Trilogy and Sophocles' Three Theban Plays are prime examples of subtle themes of sex and violence. The same themes were found in their plays that are still seen today: familial loyalty, duty to country, heartbreak, and any other that hits the senses deep within our human nature. Yes violence, death, and suicide were constantly discussed in Greek tragedies, yet the actual act of violence never took place on stage. You were only hinted at it through the literature. The same goes for sex. Greek plays were subtle in their sexual innuendos, and the acts were taken place off stage. Even Shakespearean plays were written in much the same way.

In a lot of ways, American society today is at the vanguard of a debauched and immoral era. Repentance and salvation do not seem to be ideas that our society embraces - at least as far as thematic elements in our entertainment industry... A movie does not sell unless there are scenes of violence, warfare, or sexuality. People would not go if these themes were only hinted at, and not actually seen. This makes you wonder if Mel Gibson or Russell Crow would have lasted long in Greek theater...Again, the point that I am trying to make is that our society is much less violent than the ancient Greeks yet we find it necessary to indulge in explicit entertainment. Maybe it is the lack of everyday violence in our society that makes us lust for it in other ways. Greeks may have been so accustomed to it that they did not find it necessary to portray it on stage. Greek theater was also centered around religious festivities, and it may have been offensive to the gods to portray such violence.

I just find it interesting that in a society where our soldiers rarely see the face of the enemy they kill, we are so desensitized to blood and gore, while a society that killed with their own hands (or a 6 foot spear or short sword) portrayed violence in a more subtle and tasteful fashion.

Food For Thought

As we approach the Thanksgiving season, a topic of interest has come to mind. There seems to be something very powerful about the sharing of a meal. I've always said that someday I will write my dissertation on this topic (though I am pretty sure it has already been done). There is a quote that my friends used to tell me on several occasions where I possibly overindulged in some type of meal - "Eat to live, don't live to eat." Well certainly this is true, we must not partake in gluttonous consumption, as nourishment is a means of survival. I am not going to analyze the physical effects of eating and nutrition but what I would like to discuss is the more powerful, bonding power of the shared meal."You can not fully know a person until you share 10,000 meals," - or so I have heard the quote phrased. If you really think about it, the people who are closest to you, you have probably shared many meals with.

The Last Supper is a perfect example of this concept. Jesus shared his own body and blood with the apostles as a sign of their everlasting union. This feast has been carried on weekly for almost two thousand years through the sacrament of Communion. Just by the sharing of this meal (and the acknowledgment that it truly is Jesus's body and blood) we are unified with God.

Meals are shared to bring people closer together. Armies traditionally had a "last meal" before engaging in combat. Leonidas, a Spartan general said to his troops during their last meal before the battle of Thermopylai, "Tonight we dine in Hades."

Incidentally, holidays are often centered around the big family feast. Thanksgiving is a time when extended family members reunite (sometimes for the only time during a year) to share a meal. Christmas and Hanukkah are times where a huge feast is traditionally prepared and shared to celebrate the religious festivities.

The sharing of a meal with people who are close to you is more than just a means of nourishment and survival. It is way to share and grow in relation to those who are important: family, friends, and even God.

Our Father's Providence

There are so many uncertainties in life. It is interesting to think about the forces or principles responsible for predetermining events - namely fate, chance, and providence. As Christians, we believe that our lives are ultimately in the hands of God the Father, who guides us while still allowing for us to employ our free will. The uncertainty of the future is often portrayed in literary art (Shakespeare developed the theme of fate controlling his character's actions). It is comforting to see these ideas throughout literature, as they provide a reason for us to break free of the bulwark we create (especially after thinking of our impossibly small place in such a huge universe). Something so abstract as the idea of determinism is difficult to grasp in our mind's eye. Is there a divine being in Heaven responsible for all the actions taking place on these hallowed yet mortal grounds?

In a personal sense I like to think that I have control over my life while at the same time it brings me comfort to think that my life has a purpose -though I am not sure what it will be. I like to think that everything happens for a reason, especially throughout difficult times. On a much grander scale I must question whether large events, maybe the rise and fall of a nation, occur because of "Thy" divine will. And if this is so, did every individual in that nation have a predetermined destiny that amassed the destiny of the nation? I can not name the reasons for this, for it would entail a much larger discussion of faith. Maybe I will attempt that later on.

Some Uneasy, yet Zealous Feelings

If you have read my previous writing concerning the prospect of me transferring, then I would like to illustrate some of the uneasiness attributed to this decision. I have reached the midpoint of the fall semester and I still wonder what the next few months will be like. I see only two options: staying here at the University of Scranton and continuing in the same fashion as was intended two years ago, or a complete transition will occur and I will be at Cornell, starting anew. This uncertainty pooled with anticipation leaves me feeling rather uneasy. I try not to think about it much - whether or not I will get accepted, and if I do, leaving my friends here and starting an entirely new life.

I've completely immersed myself in my studies at this point and the reason is twofold. First, in order to be admitted to Cornell my semester grades must high. Secondly, engaging in such studies allows me to focus less on my current situation, relieving some unnecessary stress. This is not to say I have disbanded my social life; my friends and I enjoy the time we spend together, which is plentiful, not to mention the usual highlight of my day.

I know that I can not get my hopes too high, yet the excitement and anticipation of transferring is certainly with me all the time.

On Tragedy in the Classic Sense

What makes something tragic? Are 9-11 and hurricane Katrina tragic in the same way that tragedy is presented in literature? The answer is no, they are not. 9-11 and hurricane Katrina are surely devastating, but tragedy, in the classical sense means something greater than a massive loss of life due to terrorism or natural disaster. I would like to examine tragedy, in a sense through the writing of Sophocles. Antigone is a tragic play with several underlying themes. Loyalty to kin versus loyalty to crown is a theme presented in the foreground of the play. The overall sense of 'tragedy' that is woven throughout the play presents some interesting concepts worthy of discussion.

What makes Antigone so tragic is that death, destruction, and misery plague the house of Creon because of the individual character's actions. The irony is that all of the death in the play is brought about by each character's effort to do good. This is what makes it tragic. Antigone thought that it was right to give her brother a proper burial, even though he had betrayed his country. Creon was trying to uphold his own laws and beliefs that traitors do not deserve the same burial rights as upholders of justice and liberty. Each stood firm in what they perceived to be right. The paradox is that because of their endeavor to advocate goodness, despair and a tragic end will come to them.

Tragedy then, as seen in the classic sense according to Sophocles, comes about when two conflicting goods meet. Neither character's intention was to do evil, yet despair would befall each of them. And in the case of Creon in Antigone, those who have been hurt by his actions were those closest to him, those of his kin. As far as tragedy in terms of 9-11 and hurricane Katrina, this underlying sense of paradox and irony is not present. There was never a conflict of good intention, only a determination to do evil and an unexplainable natural phenomena respectively.

Western Style Warfare and the Great Battle of Decision

And a Thought on the War in Iraq



The evolution of warfare and military tactics and technology is a subject of great curiosity for me. I would like to analyze the affects of the western style of war, dating back to seventh century B.C. in Greece, and then put into view an argument for why the Iraq war has been drawn out for so long.

The principle tactic of the Greek phalanx was to meet their enemy in broad daylight on the open battle field. Eight ranks deep of bronze-armored hoplites would stand ready to charge in what would be the "decisive battle." Often the entire war would be fought in a day - the immense clash of two huge armies in what is considered to be a brief, yet nightmarish, deathmatch. As impractical as this may seen by today's standards, there were several pragmatic factors for why Greeks, and later western armies would fight this style of battle.

1. Hoplites were generally citizens - farmers with no austere training regiment - who needed to attend to their land for all but a few months of the year. The summer was the only time that farmers could leave to fulfill their military duty (which was mandated for all men age 18 to 60.) Military campaigns could not go on for more than a few weeks in the summer, otherwise the economic repercussions would be severe.

2. The armor that was worn by hoplites was so unbearable, that the discomfort could not be tolerated for more than a few hours. In fact, hoplites often would not dress themselves fully (helmet, greaves, breastplate, shield, and spear) literally until the moment before the great charge.

3. The paradox is that the great decisive battle, though terrifying, bloody, and with high mortality rates, was intended to limit death. One massive pitched battle that would decide the war would in fact prevent the need for further warfare. It can be thought of as a "winner-take-all" scenario. Hoplites need only to be brave for the several hours at most (though the most hellish hours of their lives to be certain).

Let us look back at some other instances where western armies, especially the United States, have engaged in the "battle of decision." Storming the beaches of Normandy in 1944 certainly left the German force diluted. The battle of Midway in the Pacific was without a doubt the decisive battle that left the Japanese disheartened. Sure there were other battles afterwards yet Japan ceased to pose a real threat. The battle of Gettysburg is another example where two armies stood facing each other, in an engagement that would determine the ultimate victor. It was not until the post World War II era where this style of fighting became unfeasible. American soldiers had to straggle through dense jungle and unfamiliar territory while fighting in Korea and Vietnam. Let us examine this idea further while turning our attention to the present conflict in Iraq.

The style of warfare fought in the Middle East presents a stark difference to the traditional western style of war. The unconventional tactics of Al Qaida forces have forced American troops to engage in an unfamiliar type of combat. Perhaps we may attribute the lingering of the war to the failure of engaging in the great battle of decision. Americans have not yet been able to lure their enemy into a face-to-face bloodbath. If we could engage in such a deliberate contest of arms, then maybe our lenghty stay over seas would ultimately be abridged.

Difficult Decisions

The summer of 2005 was a rather decisive season for me. In June I was faced with a difficult decision, the root of which is planted some four or five years ago. As a ninth grader, the idea of serving in the United States Army was glorified. I was under the impression that the best thing I could do with my life - and my interests and talents - was to serve as an officer in the Army. I was going to go to West Point to become a revered, best of the best cadet. I accredit the dissolving of that plan to health issues and a relatively long story that I will not tell now. ROTC, however, became a more pragmatic option to me - an option that I pursued very seriously. By my junior year in high school I began applying for a scholarship and by my senior year I had received one. I chose the University of Scranton's Army Rotc Batallion, and for one year I was deeply immersed in the program. I am not going to pretend that I had an aversion for the program, though in a lot of ways it was not what I expected.

This is where my first painstaking decision developed. I had received a "slot" for a two week training program during the summer in Fort Bragg, North Carolina. I would train with the Army's special forces unit in a school called "Robin Sage." It was quite an honor as freshman cadets typically are not selected for these schools. Then summertime came. I felt no motivation, no sense of urgency in preparing for this school. In fact, I was dreading it. This made me question more than just Robin Sage - but the Army in general. I realized after thorough contemplation that the Army is not right for me. I voluntarily withdrew my scholarship and now I am back to being a civilian.

This is where my next decision, an even more difficult one for me it seems, has arisen. Now that I am not in ROTC does it make sense for me to stay at the University of Scranton? The real question is - do I even like Scranton? Well yes- and no. I have a wonderful group of friends who I would be very sad to leave, yet the atmosphere in general is somewhat unsatisfying to me. I have not yet placed a finger on it but I think there may be several factors. I think that my personality does not always fit with the atmosphere - there is not a heavy influence of art and music here. Also, the school is very small. This is not necessarily a bad thing but I feel as if I have outgrown it in many aspects. It is hard for me to explain what I mean by outgrown. Perhaps the campus being so small is a reason. I feel as if transferring would be a way for me to experience more and become involved in more interest-suited activities. I would like new challenges and new opportunities. I cannot speak ill of Scranton because I have experienced a great deal here and in many ways I have grown here. I just view it more as a stepping stone to something bigger perhaps, and hopefully Cornell will provide those opportunities. The biggest reservation (maybe the only one) that I have had has been my friends. I have the best friends in the world here and it would sadden me to leave them. But, good friends do understand that certain opportunities arise that may benefit their friends - and mine have been very supportive.

Music as Soul's Therapy

The first thing that I would like to discuss is music- in a sense that it is powerful beyond human comprehension. We have created it but we do not fully understand it. Yes, we understand how it works: how to play it, sing it, or write it, but do we know the affect it has on us? And if so, could we recognize it? Music is a fusion of art forms in the most complex nature: the written art form of providing captivating lyrics to touch the soul (though some pieces are influential enough with music alone) and the musical art form which I will discuss later.

Music is an escape from the mundane. It provides an outlet for the soul, which often does not receive its essential therapy in any given span of time. There is no greater sense of emotion one can feel than by immersing one's self deeply into music. The song of power is that which can utterly move a person. Move, I mean, in the sense that for the fleeting time that the music is played the listener is captivated, overwhelmed, silenced, and ultimately feels cheapened by it. It is as if the piece knows what the listener has experienced, and it touches deep within their heart. It is like the Western style of warfare - a brief, epic clash of massive force ensues-and soon all that is left is the awe of the beholder.

What is it that is so captivating? Musical structure is a complex, almost unperceivable art that only the proper mastery of will enhance the emotion of a piece. To understand better, let us look at an acapella piece called "And So it Goes." The best version I have ever heard was done by the King's Singers, a British acapella group consisting of only seven voices. The structure of the piece makes it potent. There is discord and tension throughout, causing the listener's ear to strain, constantly waiting for the release. It builds and builds, still tense, until finally it resolves. The resolution is a beautiful chord: the bass resonates, the baritone provides support, the second tenor holds the melody, and the first tenor's voice soars above all. The voices shift key, crescendo and decrescendo, and fill the air with a resounding tone. Eric Whitaker's Water Nights displays beautiful chords with such discord that it appears as if there is a struggle within the music. It is almost jarring to the ear. Until the final resolution - the final "Amen."

Music is an escape- an expression of fleeting emotion. Sorrow, joy, anger, passion in any sense can be felt strongly and expressed soulfully. Music is not a hardnosed art form to be studied, memorized, or blandly expressed. It is a means by which every individual may ascend for a brief moment above the toil and labor of daily life.