This was harder than I Thought it was Going to Be.

Question 1
After buying my car this summer my friend and I could not agree on whose car was better. Now these cars were very different. Mine a 1990 Volvo wagon, his a 2000 Mitsubishi Eclipse. We went back and forth about how his was faster and mine could carry more. Mine was more fuel efficient his looked better. We could not come to an agreement because we hold different local values about what makes a good car. He thinks what makes a good car is its looks and speed, and I think that for an everyday car practicality is the most important. We ended up agreeing to disagree on which was better. And decided that mine was better for a road trip, and his would be better in a race.


Question 2
The analogy “Sproul Hall is to student rights as Mississippi is to civil rights” works together with the allusion to Kafkaesque to help illustrate that the situation at Berkeley is also constraining. The analogy is there to illustrate that the student’s rights are not being recognized by the Berkeley administration contained in Sproul Hall, just as civil rights were not recognized for all in Mississippi. This was a rather bold statement that was trying to show how important student rights were and also how difficult it can be to have rights be recognized by an authority. This is where Kafkaesque comes in, that difficulty with the bureaucracy to accomplish change. Kafkaesque is a term in reference to Franz Kafka, a writer who often satirized the absurdity of bureaucracy. Savio uses this term to help introduce his claim that change within a bureaucracy is nearly impossible. They work together to show how difficult change can be. If I were an administrator with authority to make policy, I would try and meet with the student leaders and discuss options.
Question 3
Arguing on the stasis of cause is a good way not to alienate most people. People in general like to get down to the bottom of things. From the little kid who asks why, to the scientists in the lab who come up with fancy ways of asking why, we all seem to want to know why. Now in this case when Reverend Wright said these things most of the media did not ask why, they mostly said that he hated America and questioned Obama’s character. Obama could not defend the statements because the fact was that they were inflammatory. But rather if he explained the cause of the frustration of African Americans and other minorities he can help everyone have a better understanding on where the other is coming from. This creates an ethos of being a mediator between the races. Showing that he is not a hateful man but one who wants to understand and work with one another.
Arguing on the stasis of cause also helped Savio seem less a disestablishment radical, and more of a person for a better functioning government. He does this by telling us the steps he has gone through with the administration and how his ideas for change were blocked by the poor functioning of bureaucracy.