Bibliography


Bahk, Jane. "Historical oppression at heart of African American - Jewish relations ." News Release 16 Feb 1993 1. 10 Feb 2008 .

Johnson, Allan. Privilege, Power, and Difference. 2nd. McGraw Hill, 2006.

Korry, Elaine. "A Fraternity Hazing Gone Wrong." NPR Education 14 Nov 2005 1. 10 Feb 2008 .

Loewen, Lies My Teacher Told Me. 1st.

"Native Injustice." Opinion 01 Feb 2008 1. 10 Feb 2008 .

Rocky. Dir. John G. Avildsen. Perf. Sylvester Stalone, Talia Shire, Burt Young, Carl Weathers. DVD. Metro Goldwyn Mayer, 1976.

Zinn, A People's History Of The United States. 1st

It's a parent's nightmare and a nagging fear for the people who run colleges and universities: A young fraternity pledge dies when hazing gets out of control. It's happened at least once each year for more than three decades. Nine months ago it happened at Chico State University in California, and this time prosecutors did something unusual: They filed felony criminal charges against the fraternity brothers involved.
But that's not much comfort to the family of Matthew Carrington, who died during the Feb. 2, 2005, hazing accident.
In his 22 years, Gabriel Maestretti has often been a role model: an altar boy, high school homecoming king and a volunteer coach. But in the past year he's also been called a "tormentor" and "a mean drunk." And earlier this month, he became something worse: a felon.
The Butte County courtroom of Judge Stephen Benson was awash in red, the color worn by family and friends of Matthew Carrington to honor him. Gabriel Maestretti, deeply religious as a boy, had never been in trouble before. Yet, according to the district attorney, he was the most culpable in Carrington's death. He stood before the judge, baby-faced, with the physique of a linebacker, choking back tears.
"I did what I did out of a misguided sense of building brotherhood, and instead I lost a brother. I will live with the consequences of hazing for the rest of my life," Maestretti told the court. "My actions killed a good person, and I will be a felon for the rest of my life, and I'll have to live with that disability, but I'm alive and Matt's not. "
Moments later, Maestretti and three of his fraternity brothers -- John Fickes, 20, Carlos Abrille, 22, and Jerry Lim, 25 -- were handcuffed and led off to jail.
Matthew Carrington would have turned 22 this month. He grew up with his younger brother in a small ranch-style house in Pleasant Hill, east of San Francisco. Debbie Smith has a giant portrait of her son on the fireplace mantle. Dozens of snapshots fill the coffee table and bookshelves.
"We did everything together as a family, so we have tons of pictures, and I have to have them out," she said. "I have this need to just be surrounded by him. I can't put him away."
Like a lot of moms, Debbie Smith says her son was destined for great things. But Carrington's plans weren't grandiose at all. He just wanted to graduate and get a good job, marry and have kids, his mother says. Now, she mourns the wedding she'll never attend, the grandchildren she'll never hold.
Boarded-up on the edge of campus is the Chi Tau fraternity house. From the outside, the white building doesn't look like a crime scene. The basement, says Chico Police detective Greg Keeney, the lead investigator on the case, is another story.
"It's kind of like the medieval castle dungeon," says Keeney. In February, at the time of Carrington's death, the dark and dirty basement would have been very cold, says Keeney. Repeatedly scribbled on the walls was the phrase, "In the basement, no one can hear you scream."
Carrington died during Chi Tau's "Hell Week." Junior fraternity brothers were in charge and were told to be tough on the pledges. Carrington was at the Chi Tau, located in Chico, Calif., north of Sacramento to support his friend, Mike Quintana. Both were sober, according to police reports.
The two pledges were ordered downstairs and told to do calisthenics in raw sewage that had leaked on the floor. For hours, according to district attorney Mike Ramsey, they were interrogated and taunted.
There were forced pushups and trivia quizzes. Through it all, the Carrington and Quintana were ordered to drink from a five-gallon jug of water, which was filled over and over. Fans blasted icy air on their wet bodies. They urinated and vomited on themselves. Then, according to DA Ramsey, something went terribly wrong.
Carrington collapsed and started a seizure. Fraternity members didn't initially call an ambulance. By the time they did, it was too late. Carrington was taken to Enloe Medical Center, where his heart stopped. At about 5 a.m. he was pronounced dead from water intoxication, which caused the swelling of his brain and lungs. Not a single fraternity brother was there, a fact that still haunts his mother.
"All I could think of was, 'Matt's alone. Nobody is with him... why is that?' " she said. Hours passed from the hospital's first call to Carrington's parents before they learned how he died.
Hazing is illegal in the majority of states, including California. But usually it's a misdemeanor offense that brings a slap on the wrist. Most colleges have banned hazing, and rogue Greek chapters have been suspended. But sometimes the strategy backfires. Hazing expert Hank Nuwer says once they're decertified, these chapters are accountable to no one.
"It's kind of like having unregulated gangs on campus, and yet it's a hidden problem that doesn't get discussed on the news a lot," says Nuwer.
It was a problem at Chico State. Chi Tau was among a handful of suspended fraternities that had been in trouble before. For now, the school has shut down all Greek recruitment. A task force is overhauling all the rules for student conduct. And University President Paul Zingg has threatened the ultimate punishment -- an outright ban on fraternities and sororities.
"They talk about integrity and scholarship and holy friendship forever," says Zingg. "And I basically said, if that's really what you believe in, you've got a respected place on this campus. But if you're nothing but drinking clubs masquerading as fraternities, you don't."
Fraternity members pass the now-defunct Chi Tau house everyday on their way to classes. It's a vivid reminder of Carrington's death.
"We're still dealing with it. Everybody's still kind of haunted by it," says Adam Cherry, a Chico State junior and a member of Sigma Pi, a fraternity which he says doesn't haze. He thinks it's only right that the defendants are in jail. But he resents being lumped together with the young men implicated in Carrington's death.
"This fraternity, Chi Tau, was not recognized by the school, not recognized by anybody. So basically they were just a bunch of guys with letters on their house," says Cherry.
There's a growing movement to toughen the penalties for hazing. Two states, New York and Florida, have done it already, and Carrington's parents say now it should be California's turn. They want hazing out of the education code and charged under the penal code, like other violent crimes. But even that's not enough, says Debbie Smith. Something else has to change: the mindset that considers hazing just part of college life.
"I understand that they didn't intend to kill Matt," she says. "My hope is that they learned something, that we all learned something, and that they can teach others from their experience so that we don't have to have this keep happening to our children."
It may be too late for Gabriel Maestretti, who will serve one year in jail. But he, too, wants to get the message out.
"I accept my punishment, with the hope that it will serve as a warning to others not to follow the path I did," he said during his sentencing. "Hazing isn't funny, it's not cute. It's stupid, dangerous. It's not about brotherhood, it's about power and control."
For other students, the message hasn't sunk in yet. Despite the trauma of Carrington's death, two more Greek organizations at Chico State have already been suspended for misconduct this semester.

This is an article about a young college student who was a tragic victim hazing gone wrong. A son, brother and all around good person, Mathew Carrington died a month before his 22nd birthday after an emergency call to Enloe Medical Center. Carrington was a pledge at a fraternity house which had a deadly hazing ritual. The thought of brotherhood and the group clouding young kids minds in the hope of being accepted into something larger then just themselves. Brothers in the fraternity made Carrington and his friend consume large amounts of water, perform grueling physical tasks and be cold while in raw sewage as a custom of “Hell Week”. These brothers just did what they were told to do, though they may not like it, it was easier to do than argue.
This article goes along with the class discussion and Johnsons ideas in chapter 6. These kids did not necessarily agree with what they were putting Carrington through but it was certainly easier than trying to change tradition, they themselves have went through this along with others. The path of least resistance was the obvious choice to these young men and sadly it was the last choice for Carrington. The members of the fraternity keep the system going by being in it, and with that they participate in the customs and traditions which shape the upper members to continue the traditions because no one really wants to try and change it, a tradition is history and they are taught to be proud of it. This self perpetuating system has some positive effects but when weighed against death there is no benefit worth it. The members most likely didn’t realize that they were continuing a dangerous and unneeded tradition. Many are told that this builds brotherhood and the unity needed but in reality this drags people apart, through humiliation and degradation hazing has been a consistent system through sports, clubs and other types of groups. These rituals show the true power of the paths of least resistance. Though it is known that horrific things have happened it is still easier for people to continue hazing than fight against it, this shows that it is natural for people to give up their ideas for ideas of others and that social forces are extremely strong. Whether hazing or something much more publicized like racism. It is easier to just stand quiet during a joke you don’t agree with than to speak out about it. The social pressure is to laugh or don’t speak and it is strong enough to make many of us bend our ideas and beliefs.
I found it horrific that people can do this and allow themselves to be a part of this. To be part of a group and brotherhood one should build trust and compassion with others not resentment and anger. I don’t know what could have been running through Carrington’s mind while participating in these gruesome tasks, I cant imagine needing friends so badly that I would put myself through such vast amounts of pain.

“Rocky”, a hit movie that inspired people all throughout the nation is a hope story about rising through the social classes to achieve the American dream. This is a story of a not so common street fighter who through the face of adversity rises to stardom. Rocky, a uneducated single man is muscle for one of Philadelphia’s loan sharks. Also being a amateur boxer who has the reputation to take anything and keep coming gets his chance when a professional boxer gives him the chance to fight in a championship bout. Against his better instincts Rocky agrees and pushes his body, mind and soul to the breaking point just to make more out of his life than a punchy enforcer. In the end Rocky rises up and is noticed as somewhat more than just a bum who fights which shows that though it is extremely hard one can move through the social classes and change how they are seen.
This relates to what we discussed in class and to chapter 7 in Loewen’s book “Lies my teacher told me”. In the article Loewen writes about how people are not inherently stupid, they know about social class and the problems and advantages with each one. People know that it is extremely difficult to get into a higher social class and that it may sometimes just seem impossible. In the movie the main character was able to go against the odds and by sheer luck receive the ability cast into the light of the upper class. Now what he did when standing in the spotlight was what made him a hero. Unlike many people who will freeze or run when confronted with a challenge the star took his opportunity and faced what he needed to in order to get where he wanted to go. One chance, that’s all he got, in the society we live in today there are not many times when you have a chance to jump up the class ladder, one must consistently fight tooth and nail through it every day for most of their lives which is the reason it is so rare. The desire to be important and to move from nothing to greatness is the dream and desire of just about everyone. Unfortunately it is not that hard to move down the social ladder, anything from marrying below your class to mismanaging your finances could plant you in the lower class which has happened to many people in this country. Lately many people have been losing their homes and savings from the unsteadiness of our economy which is making it increasingly more difficult to move up the ladder. Rocky showed that through blood, sweat and tears one can achieve their dream but it’s not easy and comes with pain.
The movie was a great story of a hero and his triumph through the face of society’s hold on him. The theory is very good, that a man may make it to where he desires to go but not without the sacrifice that comes along with it.

African Americans and American Jews are both linked and divided by their histories of oppression, according to Paul Berman and Cornel West.
Berman, a cultural and political critic, and West, chair of African American studies at Princeton University, spoke at the Stanford University symposium "African Americans and American Jews: Bridges, Boundaries, Identities" on Friday, Feb. 12.
The symposium was sponsored by Stanford's Program in Jewish Studies, the African and Afro-American Studies Program and the Stanford Humanities Center.
When the Jews first came to America, they "encountered yet another 'tragic people' whose identities are rooted in their own oppression," said Berman, a recent recipient of a MacArthur fellowship and a frequent contributor to the New York Times, the New Yorker and the New Republic.
However, the two groups had a radically different vision of America, he said. The Jewish people saw it as a land of freedom, and African Americans saw it as a land that enslaved and oppressed them.
For immigrant Jews, America was "a different kind of situation from the past 2,500 years: With a certain amount of effort, they could, in fact, have rights. To Jews, liberalism was the counter-thesis to the aristocratic/religious-dominated society, which was oppressing," he said.
"But in America, it was one of the unique tragedies and ironies of African American existence that they were oppressed precisely by the society that defined itself as liberal."
West said that "the black folk said [to the Jews], 'We've been down for a long time. We've been here while you were getting your butts kicked in the Ukraine. We've been getting ours kicked here.'
"We're not additions to American life as you were taught in your high school courses in the 1950s and 1960s, nor are we defections [from] it; we are constituents in the formation of American civilization," said the author of the forthcoming book Race Matters.
"Every immigrant who comes with a smile has to recognize that they're going to be Americanized. . . , which is to say 'discover that you're white,' " West said. "Jewish brothers didn't know this until they got here."
Many African Americans turned from liberalism to "Third World-ism," which further divided African Americans and American Jews, Berman said.
"One of the natural consequences of this was to find - in the question of Zionism - that the Palestinians were the oppressed Third World people, and the Israeli Jews were the white European imperialists," he said.
The Jews became to the African Americans "the hypocrites that I have always known among American liberals, because it was the same liberals who practiced racial oppression."
American Jews believed that African Americans would understand and empathize with their attempts as a "despised minority to try to create rights for themselves for the first time," Berman said. "[They thought] 'Jews in the Middle East are a people like yourselves, and that Zionism is the equivalent of the civil rights movement. It is the movement of the protection of the oppressed minority.'
"The same quality which links them in some way is precisely the quality - because of the small difference between liberalism and Third World-ism - [that] sets them utterly at odds," he said.
To better understand each other, African Americans and American Jews need to know about each other's histories, West said.
They should be aware of "the profound hatred of Jews that sits at the very center of European culture" and "the profound hatred of African people [that] sits at the very core of American civilization."
"We're talking about two underdogs," West said, and "we should attempt to interpret each other's histories, to understand why the prevailing anxieties are being articulated in the way that they are."
West advocates an "all-embracing moral vision" for the future, which would be "a universal ethic in which we attempt to not lose sight of the humanity of others."
"We should try to stay attuned to the circumstances that [others] are responding to," he said. "There should be a broadening of empathy and we should try to identify with their frustrations."

This article is about the differences and similarities between the African Americans and the Jewish Americans. The text talks about how the Jews were persecuted and hindered in their homeland where they found oppression and pain much like African Americans have received here. When the Jews came to America they saw a country where they had the opportunity to make something out of their lives and where they were accepted. When compared to how they were treated in Germany that is a reasonable view, the blacks on the other hand are persecuted here. When the Jews see freedom the blacks see enslavement. The two different groups of people need to look at what has happened through both of their histories and understand the pains and turmoil’s which have been suffered to realize they are not all that different.
This article is related to chapter 2 in Johnson’s book. The title of this chapter is “Privilege, Oppression, and Difference”. This article tells how different races and classes are constructed through cultures instead of actually just being natural. While in France a white French man does not get discriminated against for being French, but if they were to travel to America they may be, or if they were to go to Africa they would most likely be treated different because they are white. African Americans were not discriminated against in Africa but once they were brought to America and enslaved whites made them the lower class. Since in America religion is not a large part of how we view each other, which is a cultural trait, and is much harder to determine than color, we do not as often discriminate against Jews. Unlike in America Europe holds a large emphasis on ones religion which made oppression of the Jews a large problem. Therefore the Jews had somewhat the same problem in their homeland that the blacks do in America. When the Jewish people came to America they saw the ability for the majority of them to be free and chase their desires without persecution, where as the blacks are put down because of the perceived notion built of a large amount of time that white is the correct race and that is really the only thing that matters. The privilege that the Jews receive here in America is vastly unmatched by African Americans because of the social construction of difference is a large part of how Americans view each other. Privilege in America is granted mostly to white males where we as Americans continuously keep this illogical idea going. The fact that the Jewish people found refuse here is because of the thought of white being the ultimate form of human existence and is a self perpetuating system. The Jews didn’t make any revolutionary steps in the help to create equality for African Americans though they wished someone would have for them in their homeland. This is related to the article because it is stated that “We should try to stay attuned to the circumstances that [others] are responding to," he said. "There should be a broadening of empathy and we should try to identify with their frustrations.”
I understand what the subject talked to talked about, when someone arrives in America there aren’t really and religious differences seen or discussed as in other countries, most thoughts and ideas in this country are based on race and skin color.

The case of the mismanaged American Indian trust funds is Dickensian both in length - now 11 years before the courts - and inequity. On Wednesday, Judge James Robertson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Interior Department had "unreasonably delayed" its accounting for billions of dollars owed to American Indian landholders and that the agency "cannot remedy the breach."
There is, of course, no full remedy - not for the historical wrongs or the cynical and shabby accounting or the years of frustration. And as Robertson and others before him have noted, a meticulously accurate tally of what the American Indians are owed is almost certainly impossible. Yet that does not mean that a reasonable compromise cannot be reached or that the government should abandon efforts to find one.
In 1996, Elouise Cobell, a Blackfoot Indian, filed a lawsuit claiming that the government had mismanaged billions of dollars in oil, timber and other royalties held in trust for some half-million Indians. The Indians were given land allotments between the end of the 19th century and 1934, a time when it was government policy to try to do away with tribal entities and reserv
ations. The government held title to the land, and these accounts were meant to collect and disburse the revenues.
The simple question is this: Can the government account for the money it held in trust? Judge Robertson's judgment: "It is now clear that completion of the required accounting is an impossible task." This, as he points out, is an "irreparable breach of fiduciary duty," a breach that, in our opinion, is all the more galling because these individual trust accounts have come over time to look like a form of paternalistic fraud.
Even with meticulous oversight, monitoring them accurately would have been a tough assignment. But the government's failure is not simply sloppy bookkeeping. It is willful neglect, including the active destruction of records and the failure to comply with court orders.
As Robertson notes, the fact that the government cannot provide a full accounting for what may be billions of dollars "does not mean that a just resolution is hopeless." He has scheduled a new hearing to try and find a remedy. We hope it will indeed mark the beginning of the end of this case and the beginning of real equity for the holders of these accounts.

This article discusses the great injustices the American government has thrust upon the American Indian. As stated in this article the government has taken control of property that the Indian’s were supposed to own but that the government declared they were owned by the state. The American government actually had the job of removing tribal entities and reservations, which aside from being un-American is a horrible travesty. The thought of just removing Native Americans from their land just to release it to whites is unthinkable; the premise that all men are created equal is what we hopefully base our country on and to allow the government to take these actions is wrong. Along with taking the land from these people the government has refused to give retribution from their seizures. This article identifies with our discussions during class, mainly from Zinn’s writing in chapter 1. Zinn discusses the desire for the Arewak to come up and welcome Columbus and his crew and only to be met with hatred and pain. When the Europeans arrived and saw the gold worn upon the Arewak’s they made up the plan to receive the gold no matter how much it hurt these native people. Columbus was under contract with his native land to return with something which would have made his journey worth while. With this bearing on Columbus’s mind he made the choice to manipulate and eventually enslave the Indians for this gold he so desperately desired. These two articles have many similarities, our government today and throughout the recent past has been removing Indians off their lands, forcing them to move from their land place to place and never just allowing them to settle, even today reservations are small and scattered because it’s not like they were here first. Columbus also took land, but unfortunately that was not all, he took fathers, mothers and children into captivity and forced them into servitude. This fact is often overlooked because it was a “necessity” to get to where we are today. Through our countless relocation and eradication of the Indian people America has been able to claim vast amounts of land which are unarguably some of the most fertile and well placed on the planet. Europe was able to use these slaves to extend their hold on a world power. With all the slaves acquired Europe could have a large amount of cheap labor while not having resources devoted the slaves. Fortunately in one sense, the Indians were able to somewhat defend themselves which unfortunately led to there eradication. If the Indians had submitted to what the Europeans desired they may have just been able to survive, granted they would have lost their land but it seems it was lost anyway.
I am not surprised by this article, I always knew that the American government used its power unethically and has removed many Indians from their land. My education when I was younger did not entirely show the severity of the situation. I was taught that Columbus was a great man and that everyone was treated equal throughout society, but as I aged I realized this is just a sugar coated theory that our government may try to portray but not nearly enforce.