Americans Are Tuning Out the World by Alkman Granitsas

Within the first few paragraphs Granitsas presents some interesting facts that back up the claim that Americans are becoming more and more disengaged with the rest of the world. For example, the American public has paid less attention to foreign affairs and does not keep up to date with what is going on thousands of miles away from home; the percentage of American university students taking a foreign language has dropped to half of what it used to be; fewer and fewer Americans have passports or travel overseas; and media coverage of foreign affairs is becoming slimmer. I thought these were all very interesting facts. Alkman Granitsas presents some very interesting thoughts as to why this may be happening: For the past 45 years Americans have witnessed a massive immigration boom. It seems like everyone else is coming here. Why would Americans want to look to the rest of the world? Much of the last two decades most Americans have seen their economic well-being grow relative to the rest of the world. Granitsas couldn't put it any simpler here. I dont think too many people think about this but, if life here is so good and the rest of the world is coming to us, why would it be any better where they are from? I think what Granitsas is asking us is this: If America is to remain a strong international power, should we not be more interactive with the world outside of our boundaries? If not how will we be able to be the strong and influencial voice for other countries that everyone perceives America to be?

America's New Empire for Liberty by Paul Johnson

Paul Johnson shows extreme patriotic pride in this essay. He starts off saying before September 11, Americas boundaries were the world, for from whatever part of the world harbored its enemies, it could be attacked and, if such enemies possessed weapons of mass destruction, mortally attacked. 9/11 was a huge awakening to America. Johnson supports his opinion by statingt that America has the language of the twenty-first century. English is already the premier world language in many respects, and this century will see its rapid extension and consolidation. America has, and will continue to acquire, the pioneering technology of the twenty-first century, its lead being widened by its success in providing a clear climate of freedom in which inventors and entrepreneurs of all kinds can operate. In the 1800's Asia produced 57% of the worlds goods whereas the west(America) only produced 29% of the worlds goods. This all has dramatically changed in the 1900 when America produced 86% and Asia 10% of the worlds goods. Paul Johnson shows us that Ameica has added $5 trillion to the annual GDP in the last quarter of the 20th century alone. Johnson is convinced that by 2050, America will constitute over a quarter of the world total and be as much as three times as big as the European Union(for example). In 2050 Johnson also believes that the Japanese working poplation will shrink by 38%, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus by 46% the European Union by 15%. While all of these countries loose the working population, America's workin population will have increased by 31% or 54 million people. Later in the essay Johnson brings up some good facts recalling that up to 1860, empire was not a term of abuse in the United States. Johnson reminds us that George Washington himself spoke of “the rising American Empire.” Johnson also tells us Thomas Jefferson was well aware of the dilemma and claimed that America was “an empire for liberty.” This is what Johnson believes America is becoming again. America’s search for security against terrorism and rogue states go hand in hand. From the Evil Empire to an Empire for Liberty is a giant step. A contrast as great as the appalling images of the wasted twentieth century and the brightening dawn of the twenty-first. All this being said Johnson has the confidence that America has the musculature and the will to take giant steps, as it has shown in the past.

Arabs in Foreign Lands by Moises Naim

Naim starts off right away describing the fact that people of Arab descent living in the United States are doing far better than the average American. That is the surprising conclusion drawn from data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2000 and released last March. The census found that U.S. residents who report having Arab ancestors are better educated and wealthier than average Americans. Another fact that Moises Naim shares with us is that 24 percent of Americans hold college degrees, 41 percent of Arab Americans are college graduates. The median income for an Arab family living in the United States is $52,300—4.6 percent higher than other American families—and more than half of all Arab Americans own their home. Naim will later tell us that the success of Arab Americans relies on the fact that most Arab emigrants tend to be younger, more motivated, ambitious, and entrepreneurial. All of these things are character traits that people must have to be successfull in America. With this in mind any Arab immigrant that is successfull in the U.S. would be successfull in any country. Then Naim goes on and explains that this must not be true because European Arabs are doing terrible. European Arabs are far worse off than those in America. In Europe the Arabs are poorer, less educated, and in worse health than the rest of the population. Naim ends his essay expressing his opinion that Arab leaders should be ashamed when they see their emigrants prospering in the United States while their own people are miserable. And Europe should wake up to the possibility that it may have less of an “Arab problem” than a “European problem.” Then again, maybe the cultural determinists have an explanation for why Europeans are so predisposed against Arab success. I believe that Naim is trying to say that the Arab leaders should fell more embarassed rather than ashamed. They should want the Arab people in Europe to have the success that those Arabs in America have. Rather than being ashamed they should be embaressed and try to help the Arab Europeans to live a better life.

The Cult of Ethnicity by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.

Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. claims that the United States needs to remember the historic forces that strove towards a nation of "one people." The U.S. was the only nation that had been successful in combining people of different races and nations into one single culture. Globally, other nations suffer from major conflict between ethnic and racial issues. Arthur M. Schlesinger lays out what the purpose of this nation was. The US became known as the "melting pot." Schlesinger states, "the pot did not melt everybody." Schlesinger's impression is that the historic forces driving toward "one people" have not lost their power. The eruption of ethnicity is, I believe, a rather superficial enthusiasm stirred by romantic ideologues on the one hand and by unscrupulous con men on the other: self-appointed spokesmen whose claim to represent their minority groups is carelessly accepted by the media. He ends his essay describing that growing diversity of the American population makes the quest for unifying ideals and a common culture all the more urgent. In a world full of ethnic and racial antagonisms, the United States serves as an example of how a highly differentiated society holds itself together. I think what Schlesinger is trying to tell us is that we Americans need to set an example for other countries. America is such a diverse country now that other countries are looking at us as leaders. Knowing this Schlesinger is telling to try and be better examples.

American Dreamer by Bharati Mukherjee

Bharati Mukherjee is an Indian born Hindu. She came to Iowa City 35 years ago to study creative writing at the University of Iowa. Muhkerjee expains to us the culture she was raised in in Calcutta India. Traditional Hindu families allow the father to choose his daughters future husband. Bharati Mukherjee did not intend to disappoint her father by settiing her own goals or by taking control of her own future. However in one of the classes she took at the University of Iowa she fell in love with a man named Clark Blaise. Blaise is an American from Canada. The two got married in a lawyers office during their lunch break. This impulsive five minute wedding changed her future dramatically. She now had loyalties towards two different cultures.
For ten years she lived in Canada with her husband until she forced her husband her two sons to relocate to the United States again. Muhkerjee describes that he life in Canada was painful, being treated as minority even though she spoke both English and French very well. Canadians considered her a "non real" Canadian because of her color.
Mukherjee goes on to explain racial acts of terrorism in Canada deepened her love of the ideals in the American bill fo Rights. She became and American citizen by choice not by simple accident of birth. Mukherjee takes her citizenship very seriously. All countries view themselves by their ideals says Mukherjee. Americans idealize themselves as the embodiments of liberty, opnness, and individualism, even though the world judges them for drugs, crime, violence, and homelessness Mukherjee says. She then explians a story about Michael Fay in Singapore who was sentenced for spray painting some cars. This was an "American" crime she explains.
Later Mukherjee expreses her excitment about as a nation we have not only the chance to retain those values we treasure from our original cultures but also the chance to acknowledge that the outrer froms of those values are likely to change. Parents express rage or despair to some aspects of Indian culture. Mukherjee would like to ask those parents this, "What is it we have lost if our children are acculturating into the culture in which we are living? Is it so terrible that our children are discovering or are inventing homelands for themselves?
Mukherjee is acknowledging that America has transformed her. She says that it does not end until she shows that she along with the hundreds of thousands of immigrants like her are minute by minute transforming America. This transformation is a two-way process that affects both the individual and the nation cultural identity.