Monster, Terrorist, Fag: The War on Terrorism and the Production of Docile Patriots – Jasbir K. Puar and Amit S. Rai

Herman Sok
Section 001
Week 6

                In the article “Monster, Terrorist, Fag: The War on Terrorism and the Production of Docile Patriots”, Jasbir K. Puar and Amit S. Rai reveal the problematic and inaccurate definition of terrorist-monsters as enemies of the US in the US war in the Middle East. Puar and Rai also reveal the local race and gender issues tied in the search for monsters. This is because monsters are defined as abnormal when compared to the “normal” standard of Caucasian, heterosexual US-citizens.

                To be honest, in the safe, college community of UC Davis, I have never really thought much about terrorists, their ideologies or rationales. Based solely on information from the media, I assumed the solution to these enemies that killed people in 9/11 was for them to be killed in the war. This article reminded me that simply labeling a group of people as terrorists does not mean they are not human. I should not be so quick to judge.

                This article also reminded me of the dehumanizing propaganda tactics of the previous wars the US was involved in.  The propaganda tactic seems to have worked again in the US-Middle East conflict because public support of this war was found. Local communities are also affected by such propaganda as it had in the past (Japanese because of WWII as to Sikh because of Middle East). It is disheartening to think that history may be repeating itself because the US is in another adventure in search of resources and power.

Why might Puar and Rai brought up the point that the “South Asian queer organizations have been relatively quiet about the racist backlash” when Sikh’s were mistaken for Taliban members in local communities (139 Puar and Rai)?

 

The United States Patriot Act

Week 6

Richard Nguyen

Section 001

April 29, 2015

            The USA Patriot Act: A Sketch gives a breakdown of need laws that are enforcement to prevent and fight against terrorism. A lot of these new laws were enforced after the September 11 attacks in New York. This may be controversial to some because a lot of the new policies give law enforcement permission to track and listen to phone conversations. Some of the law also allows the government to the ability to surveillance computer communications such a chat messages and emails. Many of people believe this is an invasion of privacy because whatever communication civilians are having they are being track to see if any criminal or terrorist acts are being committed. I believe a lot of these laws are good for the United States because I rather have our country more secure from terrorism then having to worry about the government monitoring our internet access and calls. The attack on September 11 was a terrifying event and I would not want that to happen again. People are furious at the government because they we apparently do not have privacy. But if you're not doing anything wrong or illegal then one should not have to worry about the government. It is not like the government is targeting everyone in the United States because they are only trying to track down terrorist attacks. The Patriot Act is here to help our country, not destroy it.

Question: What are some good outcomes from the United States Patriot Act?

The Influence of War on Civic Murder

Nathan Suh
Section 1
Week 5

The murders and rapes described in Hamamoto’s “Empire of Death” are horribly sickening.  He describes serial murders, but these serial killers/rapists can’t be simply written off as “crazy”.  It’s much too simple and dehumanizing to simply write off these killers as crazy.  As part of an advancing society, we need to learn how to understand what shapes mass murderers and try to prevent developing them.  The key influence in many of these mass murders and rapes, Hamamoto asserts, is the Vietnam war.  In some instances, there was mass murder and rape of the Vietnamese people during the war.  Hamamoto posits that this widespread killing and hyper-militarism by the United States “normalizes and justifies” the murder of Asians in some eyes.  My question is, have violent murder rates increasing in other countries who have gone to war?