What a Day, What a Life!

Malcolm X and “Who Taught you to hate yourself? Video

kjroberson — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 03:46:30 +0000

This video is relevant to our class since we talked about Malcolm X starting out as a racist, then moving more to inspiring the African Americans to segregate themselves, not because they were inferior, but because until they became proud of who they were, they were not going to fight for change.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRSgUTWffMQ

King – Transformation from Conservative, Moderate, to Liberal

kjroberson — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:51:39 +0000

Is King a conservative, moderate or liberal?

Martin Luther King’s life evolved from 1956 to 1968 from a conservative to a moderate, then finally to a liberal. However, the philosophy he continually preached was of “nonviolent resistance.” (12) Even though the basic message remained the same, the manner in which he delivered it certainly changed.
King spent a great deal of time in his early public years (1956 – 1960) teaching the young people how to resist through nonviolence means. Often times his messages were proclaimed at church or other Christian organizations such as the YMCA (Young men’s Christian Association) or YWCA (Young Women’s Christian Association) and generally directed to college age African Americans. When addressing these crowds King often referred to the bible as the foundational truth in which the nonviolence must emulate from. In the first five chapters of the book A Testament of Hope, the Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King Jr., King stresses heavily the Agape love found only through God. The deep seeded roots as a minister are evident in many of the speeches that King delivered. Not only does he refer to the bible, but also references the Declaration of Independence, Supreme Court rulings, and ancient Greek philosophers.
Once philosopher that King drew insight from was Greek philosopher Heraclitus who “argued that justice emerges from the strife of opposites, and Hegel, in modern philosophy, preached a doctrine of growth through struggle.” (135) King used these ideas to emphasize that America was evolving from the old ways of segregation and turmoil to a distinct fight for civil rights among the masses. Kings continued to draw strength from the conservative foundation of freedom, and used that wisdom to propel his ideas of nonviolence resistance as a means to achieve freedom for all.
Around 1960 King realized he needed to move into the middle ground of modernism in order to have the Civil Rights movement propelled further. King’s presentations began to bring in global perspectives. He started to realize there was much to be learned from other nations regarding how people are treated. He even took a trip to India in 1959 that began to help shape his thinking process. King began to outright address the governments handling the injustices of society against the African American population and specifically target laws and Supreme Court cases as seen in chapter 26. King bold laid out a plan for the president where “the president is the embodiment of the democratic personality of the nation, both domestically and internationally. His own personal conduct influences and educates.” (154) King clearly moved past the Christian community and reached out to the political influences that were available to him and challenged the president to make some changes in regards to Civil Rights. He went so far as to address Executive orders that previous Presidents issued in attempts to force the president to adhere to what ground work has previously been laid. (155) These ideas began to reach out to a broader audience that was including a great number of whites.
Perhaps the most remembered speech King gave that included several whites in the audience was the I Have a Dream speech. This presentation at the Lincoln Monument in 1963 concluded with Kings hope that “one day when all of God’s children – black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Catholics and Protestants – will be able to join hands and to sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, ‘Free at last, free at last; thank God Almighty, we are free at last.” (220) Even though King was not the organizer at this event, his popularity as a Civil Rights leader allowed his message to reach an even greater population of America and the world. King realized that it was necessary for all walks of life to buy into the ideals of the Civil Rights Movement or it was not going to succeed.
Around 1964 King made the switch from moderate to liberal. King moved out of the realm of just looking at the wrongs occurring against the black community, to standing in direct opposition to the war in Vietnam and the policies of the American government. This caused many of his previous supporters to position themselves away from him and several others began to call him anti-American. King explained his position against the war as “I was so increasingly compelled to see the war not only as a moral outrage but also as an enemy of the poor, and to attack it as such.” (635) King directly related the funds shifting from helping the underserved in America to fighting a war on foreign soil as a direct link to continued racism and exploitation of the poor.
The letter from Birmingham City Jail (chapter 46) allows King to have a chance to openly discuss his non violent resistance ideas with the public, but also bring to life the plight the black community faces on a daily basis. King attacks unjust laws by agreeing with Saint Augustine “An unjust law is no law at all” (293) In this particular letter King addresses the fact that he has transformed to being an extremist and relishes in the idea that he is in good company. Kings list of extremists include Jesus, Martin Luther, John Bunyan, Abraham Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson and expounds on the accomplishments for the good of the people they achieved. (297-298) King clearly changed his idea that he must be reserve when presenting the issues to outright calling the issues evil and proclaiming himself to be an extremist for the cause.
While King started out as a conservative, his life experiences transformed his position to that of a moderate, and eventually on to a liberal. During these transformations, his message stayed the same; the only way to win the battle against Civil Rights was through non-violent strategies.

“The Power of Nonviolence”

kjroberson — Sun, 17 Apr 2011 02:26:19 +0000

Essay three entitled The Power of Nonviolence is perhaps the most historic of the first five essays, as its targeted audience was college students, and its message was one of nonviolence. King was invited to speak at a conference at the University of California on June 4, 1957 by the YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association) and YWCA (Young Women’s Christian Association). King declared that “there was a philosophy undergirding the Montgomery boycott, the philosophy of nonviolent resistance.” King firmly believed that “nonviolent resistance is not a method of cowardice. It does resist.” He emphasized in the trainings that this was “nonaggressive physically but strongly aggressive spiritually.” (12)
King’s philosophy included the idea that the violence breeds bitterness while nonviolence fostered reconciliation and in the end a sense of community for the people. He went on to imply that the resistance was not aimed at individuals but at a system that was detrimental to the African American people. This idea was powerful, as it brought to light for the students how to resist peaceably against the evil that was besetting them. This idea he proclaimed included the fact that the “struggle is rather between justice and injustice, between the forces of light and the forces of darkness.” King believed it would be a “victory for justice, a victory for good will, a victory for democracy.” (13) King took the focus off the people provoking the situation and brought to light that the real issue was one of injustice not just bad behavior. That message helped people understand the fight was not against a few people, but against a wrong that was being done to a whole group of people.

When looking at the struggle against violence King taught that the biggest struggle was within, an “internal violence of spirit.” King went on to explain how the only way to change society was to “keep love at the center of our lives.” King taught about the Agape form of love found in scriptures as defined “understanding, creative, redemptive good will for all men.” He instructed all involved in the nonviolence movement that until they could use the Agape form of love and love as Christ loved, hating the deed, but loving the person, no end would come to the evil besought upon the African American people. (13) King acknowledged that not everyone believes in God, but all had to agree that there was a force in nature that was working toward justice for all. While preaching nonviolent resistance King continued to press for the fact that they must press on in the struggle against the injustices and fight for their rights, using the agape love techniques of nonviolence. King declared “We must continue to move on. Our self-respect is at stake; the prestige of our nation is at stake.” “We must keep moving with wise restraint and love and with proper discipline and dignity.” (14) King was encouraging the students in the audience that to stop participating in the movement would not help the cause, but only when they fought together in a nonviolent manner would the evil be spotlighted and society would be able to see the injustices beseeching the African American peoples.

Finally King taught that the people should not be “Maladjusted” to the problems of life. This means that they should never adjust to the social circumstances or environment since there was not equality for all. He proclaimed that the people needed to stand in opposition to the treatment that was being forced upon them and not accept it as the way it was. He declared “God grant that we will be so maladjusted that we will be able to go out and change our world and our civilization.” (15) King challenged the young people in the group to stand up and fight with courage and honor as they battled for their civil rights.

This essay is worth considering as it is a philosophy that can be used in life in general. Anytime a power struggle occurs, one party believes they are lord over the other person. It is true fighting never solves anything, and only when one person takes the high road of refusing to sling dirt and throw punches, but to show true love for the other person, can the issues be resolved. This advice would be relevant in personal relationships as well as on the grand scheme of national relations. Kings very precise definition of how to treat others, and still press on for justice is a great motivator. His words carried the students into the march against the injustices of racism and helped to further the cause of fighting for Civil Rights.

Nature of Racism

kjroberson — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:02:03 +0000

What does Thomas Sugrue’s Sweet Land of Liberty tell us about the nature of racism?
The nature of racism can be best described as the self-interest of a group of people exceeding the best interest of another group of people. The black community is often noted as the most deeply hurt group of people due to racism that has occurred throughout history. Many times people will argue that they are not a racist, but their actions will demonstrate that they clearly have an agenda that is designed to propel their own ideas above that of others.
Unfortunately the black community has experienced the most blatant forms of racism. In an effort to reach for better living conditions the white community created an environment that was conducive to their advancement while caring little for the advancement of the colored people living around them. As whites desired a better community life they found themselves moving out to the suburbs often times into locations that forbid blacks to move into them. Sugrue discussed Levittown (chapter 7) as a place where the “whiteness of Levitt’s vast developments, and of postwar suburbia in general, was not an accident.” (201) He goes on to state “Private but legally enforceable restrictive covenants – attached to nearly every housing development built between 1920 – 1948 – forbade the use or sale of a property to anyone other than white.” (202) Whites were prospering from the leapfrogging to the suburbs and the clear racial lines were being etched deeper into society as the blacks were not allowed to make that same leap. Doing this deepened the disparity between the whites and blacks and caused racism to deepen in America.
White people who made the leap to suburbia enjoyed better schools, shopping, office space, medical facilities, parks and other amenities, which caused a negative chain reaction in the black neighborhoods. The self-interest of the whites gave them better opportunities which provided the ability to afford better houses, which left the less desirable homes available to the blacks who were not able to move out and could not afford to if they wanted to. With the increased level of income leaving a central location the people remaining in the area would have been subject to higher prices in housing, furnishings, groceries, and general supplies as the owners of the business or houses charged higher prices to sustain their same level of income. Sugrue mentions black leaders were often discussing the “intertwined problems of race, unemployment, ghettoization, and inadequate education.”(271) The fact that the whites were able to live in areas off limits to blacks immediately set up a system of racial barriers. Whites were able to obtain the better jobs since many of the business owners moved their business out of inner cities which left the blacks with no way to get to work causing a deep burden of unemployment . Further, the lack of income, work, and pride caused a sense of poor self-esteem and pride in one’s community which then became subject to the ghetto syndrome, or very run down. When a group of people feel there is no hope, and they don’t have the resources to provide for themselves, they can no longer take care of their property which decreased its values.
All of these areas were further complicated by the fact that educational opportunities were significantly reduced for the black community. Whites had better opportunities for the most advanced education, while blacks were subjected to the separate but equal philosophy, which eventually proved that separate was nowhere close to equal. The whites were concerned with getting the best education for their children in buildings that were up to date and had the top notch equipment available at the time. The teachers were the best in the field and the students had choices as to classes they wanted to take. However, the whites did not have the same regard for the black children who did not have the same facilities, opportunities, or materials in which they could learn the same information and thus be a contender for the jobs whites were after. In this case, the whites saw the plight of the blacks, but were not willing to suffer so the blacks could get ahead. This cyclical problem continues through the next generation as the poor education then leads to lack of quality employment, which produces poor living conditions, and then drives the division between blacks and whites further. The self interests of the whites were a far greater factor than worrying about equality for all and caused racism to spawn deeper into society.

Malcolm X

kjroberson — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 02:17:13 +0000

Keeping X’s advice in mind, how would you assess the changes in his attitudes towards white people over the course of his entire life.
When Malcolm Little was born his family was assaulted physically and verbally by the white man. Malcolm’s father was murdered by white people when Malcolm was only a child. The treatment Malcolm received from the white people made him become bitter. Whites began telling his mother that she was crazy and even moved Malcolm out of his home to live with a white family. While living with this family Malcolm explains he felt that the whites were treating him like a pet, not a member of the family. With each new experience hatred toward the whites grew. As he made choices that led him down a path of violence, destruction, and eventually prison, he began to see that whites were what he called the problem with the negro society. Whites wanted the negro suppressed and they wanted to make a living on what money the negro did have. Malcolm, or “Red” as he was being called became a “hustler” making a living tricking individuals, selling drugs, and setting up seductive encounters for white customers and clients. After Malcolm was sent to jail, he was introduced to the Islam faith where the white man was called the devil for the treatment of the Negros. Malcolm began to understand that the plight in life the Negro experienced was due to the hand of the white who had “out of his devilish nature, had pillaged, murdered, raped, and exploited every race of man not white.” (165) Malcolm then joined the Islamic faith and his name was changed to Malcolm X to represent his true African roots. As he became one of the greatest leaders for recruiting blacks to the Nation of Islam, he preached vehemently that the whites were responsible for the problems of the negro. However, once Elijah Muhammad turned on Malcolm, he left the Nation of Islam according to the American interpretation. He then went on a Pilgrimage to Mecca where he learned that not all whites were evil, that in deed they could be brothers (371), that not all whites were racist ( 374), and that it was up to the negro to pull themselves away from the control of the whites since they had become accustomed to their provisions. (384)
2. How would you assess the changes in his attitudes toward other African Americans over the course of his entire life.
Malcolm was an African American who was very proud of his race. However, he associated best with the African Americans in the ghetto. His sister Ella tried desperately to have Malcolm integrate with the upper class African Americans but Malcolm continued to associate and live with those in the ghetto. (45) Malcolm became very frustrated at the attempts of African Americans to assimilate into the white society. He believed they were selling themselves out trying to belong. Malcolm was frustrated with the African American “integrations” as the people were willing to throw their money away to the white man. (117) After Malcolm became a part of the Nation of Islam, he began to believe the white man was the devil and that the African American race was the true race and they needed to be elevated. He preached of the evils that were done against the Negro in an attempt to have them convert to the Islamic religion. (222)
3. Was Malcolm X a racist? [You are allowed to pick any answer you like, as long as you cite evidence from the book to back it up.]
Malcolm X was a racist for a good part of his life. As he grew up he saw the deprivation caused by the white and he became very angry with them. He did not see any white as being worthy of a nice word or name. He saw them as evil and dangerous. He became convinced they were the devil (164) and that they were the downfall of the African American race. Malcolm blamed the whites for all the evil that was occurring and spoke frequently that the whites were responsible for the state of the African American. After the recruitment to the Nation of Islam, Malcolm refused to allow whites into the meetings, and stressed segregation from the whites instead of allowing the whites to continue to control the environment in which the African American lived. Some may say this is not racist, however, at this point in Malcolm’s life he was not willing to see that not all whites thought slavery and the deprivation the African Americans were experiencing were the direct result of all whites. (253)
However, at the end of Malcolm’s life after Elijah Muhammed turned on Malcolm he made the journey to Mecca where he was in the presence of all colors. He began to see that all people have value and under the right circumstances can live peaceably with each other for a common goal. He even claimed that “Orthodox Islam which had given me the insight and perspective to see that the black man and white men truly could be brothers.” (371) When Malcolm continued to push for segregation it was not so much to see the division in the races, but “in a competitive American society, how can there ever be any white-black solidarity before there is first some black solidarity?” (382) Malcolm was trying to prove that only when the African Americans begin to take care of themselves can they see themselves as a part of the whole, and not subservient to the white. He was pushing for the human race to become one. In one instance a white man asked Malcolm if he would shake hands with a white man and Malcolm responded “ I don’t mind shaking hands with human beings. Are you one?” (370) These statements show that over the course of Malcolm’s life he began to realize that all races and people have both good and bad and that it is not fair to classify a race as a whole group of people as evil.

Does Wal-Mart’s Pick Up Today raise the bar?

kjroberson — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:58:48 +0000

Wal-Mart is rolling out its new service for online shoppers across the country. But is it better than what competitors offer?

http://money.msn.com/saving-money-tips/post.aspx?post=4c155c62-723f-460a-910c-7ba4db5a62be>1=33009

Conservatism in Mainstream America

kjroberson — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 04:39:38 +0000

Conservative ideas moved into main stream America by the end of the century through religious organizations, corporate indoctrination, public education, and the grass roots white collar middle class workers. Using these avenues to proclaim the ideas of free market versus social welfare programs, main stream America became the center of the political agenda of Conservatism.

One of the main ways the conservative ideas moved into the center of American politics was through the mobilization of religious groups. The Reverend Jerry Falwell of Liberty University, and founder of the Moral Majority in Lynchburg, Virginia was one of the leaders who helped to launch this initiative. His goal was to reach down to the local population of people and motivate the conservatives to vote on moral issues as well as inspiring them to “lobby intensively in Congress to defeat left-wing social-welfare bills that will further erode our precious freedom.” This idea under his leadership spread out among the grass roots churches of mainstream America where the congregations became enlightened by local pastors and business owners to help keep the “intrusive government” from making new laws that would endanger their tax exempt status. (231) When a fundamental group of people get the word out, it has a far reaching impact as all ages, economic and social statuses, as well as races would become informed.

While churches became one place to inform the people, corporations also became public figures in proclaiming the conservative policies. General Motors, CEO, Thomas Murphy, proclaimed to the business community “through us, the public must see corporations in the same human terms that they see the president.”(197) They had to become visible to the public so the people would understand it was personal for the corporations too, not just big money demanding their own way. This idea worked as CEO’s began to send out letters to their manufacturers and suppliers, such as Roebuck the President of Sears, who sent personal letters to each of them in order to inform them of the various laws that were proposed and asked them to get involved in the fight by contacting their congressmen.(199) The smaller businessmen did just that and they in turn passed the information on to their employees to further the support of the people which allowed the conservative movement to dig deeper into the heart of America.

Education needed to be given to the young people of America as so many people were entering the work force and did not have any idea was free enterprise meant. It became the mission and vision of the Roundtable’s Public Information Committee that the only way to stop the idea that free enterprise had a negative impact on society was to “educate the public about economics through classes at the high school level.” (193) When the business community began instructing the young people about free enterprise the ways of thinking began to change and a new generation of thought developed that allowed people to understand what free enterprise was and why it must be protected, thus propelling the conservative movement deeper.

One final avenue that proves the drastic shift to mainstream America comes from the drive of Richard Viguerie who started the Conservative Digest magazine. Viguerie advocated “the Real base for the conservative movement needed to be the blue-collar white people, the descendants of Irish or Italian or Eastern European immigrants, with ‘traditional’ social values.” (215) It was his hope that this group of people would turn toward taking care of their own families and be less reliant on the government for aid or of the unions. By going after the middle class worker, the conservative movement was striking at the heart of the nation.

Mainstream America became the thrust of the conservative movement as the religious leaders, CEO’s, teachers, and bosses began to instruct their people on what free enterprise meant and why it was important.

News Cast Black Population dropping in big cities

kjroberson — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 02:10:25 +0000

The news cast linked below is relevant to our class as it discusses the decisions African Americans are making to move out of the inner cities and move to the suburbs in hopes of finding a better life. It also references how many African Americans are moving from the north to the south which is just the opposite of what happened in the early 20th century.
http://http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42220752#42220752

Conservatism Rough Draft

kjroberson — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 03:28:03 +0000

Conservatism paper VERY Rough Draft! When thinking about conservatism and realizing it is generally assumed that it will have respect for traditional institutions and will generally take things more slowly as they will distrust the government, it is clear to me that the conservative class has not been bamboozled but rather makes decisions based on their deep ceded morals and values.

The best evidence of Conservatism prospering without people being bamboozled is found in Invisible Hands written by Kim Phillips-Fein. This book is dedicated to the many conservative business people who made it their life’s mission to stop the new deal programs. Lemuel Boulware and F. Clinton White are two examples Phillips-Fein lists as making it their ambition to “Combine financial and political strength of business to reshape America.”(188) It was their ambition that working class Americans understood that they held the power to reshape the government and the economy. Some may say that the people were bamboozled to believe certain things, however, the Business Roundtable group rallied to teach economics to the general public beginning in high school. While some of the lecture may have been skewed, it also taught the basic principles of the market to those in attendance. Anytime someone is educated to think and pay attention to the details, will eventually have the payoff of informed decisions. It is this type of thinking that has kept the conservative movement rallying along.

When trying to teach the people about economics, it became clear that the free enterprise system was an important point that required education which came from Lewis Powell lawyer and president of the American Bar association and Eugene B. Sydnore, Jr, Director of the American Bar Association. Together they mobilized with a powerful statement “The first need is for businessmen to recognize that the ultimate issue may be survival – survival of what we call the free enterprise system, and all that this means for the strength and prosperity of America and the freedom of our people.” The efforts of these two men and others like them enabled people to learn more about the free enterprise system and thus make informed decisions about what to vote for and why it mattered. Some people are good at getting people worked up so they will react to their cause, however, conservatives generally take a look at the heart of the matter and judge it according to their belief system. When using their beliefs as a moral compass, it is easy for individuals to agree that the free enterprise system is the best economic plan for Americans as it required less government control.

When looking at government control providing programs to the American people, the cost was going to come from the tax base which meant the white collar workers were going to suffer the most. Richard Viguerie “believed that the real base for the conservative movement needed to be blue-collar white people, the descendants of Irish or Italian or Eastern European immigrants, with ‘traditional’ social values. He wrote “union members were the ideal constituency for the conservative movement: ‘the individual member began to realize that the more social programs his boss forced on the government, the more it was going to cost him.” Any reasonable thinking adult understands that in order to fund a new program the money is going to have to come from somewhere. Viguerie rallied support from the unions as he began to proclaim the truth of the economic stimulus the government was enacting through social programs as he enlightened the people to the fact that the more the government doled out in dollars, the greater the tax need to pay for it. When people have an economic understanding of money gone for programs that don’t benefit the wage earner, it is easy to vote against many of the social programs established by the government. A very clear example of this is the current Health Care Reform settlements that many states have waged against the federal government. While many people are left without health care coverage, which some choose not to have, it became clear that the American people were going to fund this cause with a greater amount of debt.

As people were falling into the government intervention of various New Deal programs, that were being resurrected, J. William Middendorf a Wall Street investment banker, began to fight liberalism. He stated “One of my main concerns at the time was that businessmen, for the most part, did not understand politics and the mechanics of the political system, while the unions did.” “The lack of political activity in the business community created an imbalance in favor of the unions, and I decided to do something about it.” Middendort an educated businessmen made it his ambition to fight against the unions as they were gaining support for the more socialist programs, and Middendort understood that more support meant government control of the business in general. It was with deep conviction of heart regarding the negative outcomes that government intervention would bring upon the free enterprise system that rallied many other supporters. When a group of people band together to educate the public and specifically business people regarding the evils of government run business, that does not mean people were bamboozled since there would be evidence supporting the claims.

Not only business people were fighting against government intrusion, but religious organizations as well. Christian conservatives sought “power not in order to establish binding moral rules for the broader society but merely to protect their own institutions from the intrusive government.” One of the benefits that America has is that it’s religious institutions are able to apply for and be approved of a tax exempt status. While many may not think that is a big deal, the religious organizations were the original social services as they were responsible for feeding the poor, orphans and widows. They often pay unmet bills, and provide a host of other services. If the government were to take that status away, the ability to help more people would be drastically cut, and the government would dictate their laws versus the religious institutions following the laws of God and there would be greater conflicts. The people of the conservative movement understand that God is their moral compass and government is often in conflict with His laws and morals and have band together to fight the intrusion of government as their morals and values were the most important principles to live by.

Living by morals and values to some is more important than making the almighty dollar, and at times that idea may be in contrast in the same business. Bwethany Morton, author of To Serve God and Wal-Mart provides evidence that big business like Wal-Mart can operate on Moral values while at the same time making money. One union representative mentioned that if “Mr. Sam comes and shakes their hands, and listens to them, that’s the greatest thing that ever happened. It don’t matter that he did nothin’ – just that he sat there and listened to you.” When reading Morton’s explainations of peoples reactions to Walton, it became clear that the employees felt validated that they were important to Mr. Walton and therefore were willing to work for him. This carried over into the shopping community as well as the customers felt a personal connection to Mr. Walton and were therefore willing to pay his prices for the products they desired to have as opposed to shopping elsewhere. This is an example of customer service and compassion from the higher ups paying larger dividends emotionally for the worker and shopper and larger financial dividends for the employer. In this instance people were being served both emotionally, but also financially.

On the other side of the coin however, is Thomas Frank, author of What’s the Matter with Kansas?, who mentions that Kansas is skewed with miss led ideas that he calls “close-knit business community, or to penetrate the sweet pink lies that cover Cupcake Land.” His blatant calls of ineptness are representative of his idea that people in Kansas are fooled by the politicians and business owners. However, careful analysis of the people demonstrates that conservative Kansans particularly tend to vote with their money on the issues that they deem follow their ideals and moral values.

When looking at what makes the global economy work most effectively, the analysis comes back to the values of an individual as remaining near the top of the list of must haves. Morton asserts “Family values are an indispensable element of the global service economy, not a distraction from it.” It is with this idea in mind that Walton established his chain store Wal-Mart and why the consumers are so willing to do business there. Family values are the heart of the people in conservative areas and a business that incorporates those values into their business philosophy would appeal to shoppers and employees. Having an opportunity to work and do business in an area where your belief systems are upheld allows people to feel more comfortable and willing to do business there. When people have a connection, they feel better about the business they are conducting and thus don’t feel threatened. It is with this trust factor that many people operate and therefore are not bamboozled in most cases as word travels fast about the business ethics a business possesses and people learn quickly who they will and will not do business with.

The model that Wal-Mart followed for establishing its working relations with the community was in the social realm. At the time it was generally thought that a woman was to perform the “social skills” aspects and men were to be in business or management. Moreton mentions “The women in the stores-customers as well as waged employees – made their priorities known, and management responded accordingly.” It is with this idea that the people who worked for and shopped in Wal-Mart were most respected by Walton, he was not afraid to listen to what the women wanted and needed and then try to model his business after their ideas. When a business person realizes that the women generally are responsible for the operations of the home and that includes the purchases it is always a wise decision to listen to their demands and suggestions. Women are not just drawn into an establishment for the gimmicks, but also for the customer service, product satisfaction, and general respect they feel when in the establishment. Walton understood this and tried to develop an environment in which the conservative women specifically felt welcome as they had links and networks to a vast world of potential customers, and the price was right in many of those environments so the relationship was a mutual benefit.

The relationship between the general public and political issues is also uniquely tied as the people make informed decisions based on their moral beliefs. Frank cites Tim Golba “You can’t stir the general public up to get out to work for a candidate on taxes or the economy. People today are busy, But you can get people who are concerned about the moral decline in our nation. Upset enough to where you can motivate them on the abortion issue, those type of things.” This brings forth evidence that people are not ignorant but driven by their moral roots and make decisions based on their foundational beliefs.

Moreton mentions “cheap labor, low state investment in the public welfare, and open international markets for its commodities – survived intact from the South’s nineteenth-century planters.” This idea provides insight that the people who participate in the market with Wal-Mart understand the consequences of being in a business such as this, however, making the almighty dollar is far worth the side effect.

Victimology is an alternative idea that Frank mentions drives decisions made by the Kansas Cons. According to John D. Altevogt Kansans “understand themselves as victims besieged by a hateful world absolves conservatives of responsibility for what goes on around them. It excuses them for their failures; it justifies the most irresponsible rages; and it allows them, both in politics and in private life, to resolve disputes by pointing their fingers at the outside world and blaming it all on a depraved liberal elite.” This idea is preposterous as people in general understand that a hateful world does not absolve you of personal responsibility for your actions. Bibliography Frank, Thomas. What’s the Matter With Kansas. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2004. Moreton, Bethany. To Serve God and Wal-mart, The Making of Christian Free Enterprise. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2009. Phillips-Fein, Kim. Invisible Hands, The Businessmen’s Crusade Against the New Deal. New York: W.W. Norton, 2009.

Dr. Rees’s book review on Moreton.

kjroberson — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 03:46:58 +0000

Dr. Rees wrote an excellent review of Morton’s Wal-Mart book which was posted on the following link in 2009.

http://walmartwatch.org/blog/archives/guest-book-review-to-serve-god-and-wal-mart-by-bethany-moreton/

If you can’t get there type in

Guest Book Review: To Serve God and Wal-Mart, by Bethany Moreton.