Senior Project: Research Paper
Aiyana Anderson
Senior Project Advisor: Jessica
McCallum
12th
Grade Humanities
Animas
High School
April
22nd, 2013
INTRODUCTION
“Elements of fashion are more highly valued
for what they signify than for their formal visual beauty” (Hollander, 33). The relationship between fashion and power is
profound and permeates nearly every culture throughout nearly every time period. Design aesthetic is an art form that has bled
into current popular culture. However,
fashion is so much more than simply a material preoccupation with a pretty
dress or outfit. Clothing sends a signal
to the world and influences people beyond what the designer or the wearer
realizes. This is especially important due to the
fact that every human being engages in clothing style to some extent. Fashion is a powerful tool for liberation and
control that represents integral social structures while acting as a
controlling force.
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Fashion has been
present all throughout history, intertwined in every culture, in every corner
of the world. Specific styles have
evolved throughout the years, but the relevance as to how fashion represents,
interacts with, and influences different aspects of culture has never dwindled. Although fashion has always been an important
part of world culture, it has become more apparent as individual cultures have
globalized. Smaller, lesser known and
unique styles integrate with the popular world fashions: some become lost in
the mix while others, such as tribal prints, become prominent, influencing
other cultures all around the world.
Within style
culture throughout the globe, people are undergoing a schism between those who
‘buy into’ fashion and those who ‘opt out.’ The ones who reject the common stereotypes shun
any clothing associated with popular styles, believing that by pushing fashion
aside they are freed from any interactions with the power of fashion. However, in reality they are simply becoming
a member of another fashion group: one with distinctly different styles, but
still fashionable in its own way. Thus,
it is essential for every member of the world community to understand that everyone
contributes to the fashion world in their own way and that every contribution
has a profound effect on its culture.
Power has a
relationship with many things in culture and society, but it is especially
strong with fashion. Power is a
representation of how much clout one holds in society, the level of self-esteem
in an individual, and how much control someone has over others and
themselves. All of these things can
clearly be seen in styles of apparel throughout civilization. Individualization, or the display of unique
personality, empowers people to express themselves.
SUMMARY OF PAST RESEARCH
Fashion is an
important element of society, representative of social structures. Karen T. Hansen evaluates cultural and
anthropological factors influencing fashion in different parts of the world in
her article, “The World in Dress: Anthropological Perspectives on Clothing,
Fashion, and Culture.” In many cultures, fashion and dress have
been the way of demonstrating a member’s social ranking. For example, in La Paz, Bolivia, there are
fierce class clashes “fueled by women's dress… between Aymara-speaking migrants
who are live-in servants…and ‘white’ elite households” (Hansen, 374). The fact that clothing can be the driving
force behind conflicts based upon class demonstrates how important it is in
many different aspects.
Fashion can also be
an integral part of a society and a defining factor to cultural identity. An example of this is in Guatemala, where traje, the traditional Maya dress, is a
key part of the Mayan culture. This
occurs throughout the world, even in the other hemisphere near Nigeria in
Yorubaland, where “dress creates, denotes, and reinforces identity” (Oyeniyi, 6).
Although people may not always be aware
of connections between culture and fashion, their relationship penetrates deep
into our societal identity.
Extensive
correlations have been drawn between clothing and its effects on individuality
and community. Joshua Miller
investigated the relationship between fashion and democracy, and found many parallels.
One thing that stood out was the way
that both democracy and fashion can give power to the individual while at the
same time creating a strong sense of community.
For example, “If citizens see themselves as members of radically
different worlds, divided by sharp divisions of wealth and status, they might
not imagine the possibility of common action, but if their clothes remind them
of links with one another, they may feel less isolated and enfeebled” (Miller,
5). So a group with similar attire can be
strengthened regardless of each individual’s differences. At the same time, clothing can encourage
individuality resulting in disjunction between people. “Fashion is at one and the same time a means
for expressing ones individuality and the very power that threatens it”
(Schiermer, 91). This pattern is
prevalent in all aspects of society, throughout all time. Humans simultaneously strive to be individuals
while longing for a sense of community: two conflicting necessities. These yearnings manifest themselves in styles
of clothing. An example of this is the
military, where each member wears the same uniform to create a sense of
community and conformity throughout, while something as simple as a striped
emblem or badge distinguishes them as an individual. “Thus fashion represents nothing more than
one of the many forms of life by the aid of which we seek to combine in uniform
spheres of activity the tendency towards social equalization with the desire
for individual differentiation and change” (Simmel, 543). Fashion is the perfect outlet for everyone’s
disjoint conglomeration of desires.
Common factors of
style have been slowly but constantly fluctuating throughout many years in a
cyclical manner. In a study done by
Richardson and Kroeber, oscillations in style were found to span a course of a
hundred years, for each of the measured factors: “a décolletage line, waist
line, and skirt line” as well as the horizontal amplitude and relative spacing
of these elements (524). By examining
each of these components, the continual swaying of styles was apparent,
although with some amount of variation throughout. Thus, “Styles are stochastic systems, neither
entirely random nor deterministic, but instead a mixture of structure and
chaos” (Lowe, 540).
Women’s style
evolution began fairly stagnant while the fashion of men changed at a faster
pace. Women’s clothes stayed bland and
unflattering while men’s tailoring improved, resulting in new developments. Eventually, women’s clothing began to change,
mirroring the tailoring and style that men’s clothing had taken on years before.
“The initial formal modernity of it all
was a radical borrowing from the male, who had learned to modernize at the
start of fashion itself” (Hollander, 33).
ANALYSIS
Due
to the fact that everyone interacts with fashion to some degree, clothing
wields a vast amount of power. Styles
have changed throughout history while simultaneously representing free speech
and group dynamics. It is important to
understand the amount of influence it has over every individual from how people
interact with one other to how people represent themselves through their
clothing.
The gradual
evolution of fashion allowed both women and men to express their personality
and individuality through what they wore.
Initially, clothing began out of necessity and slowly developed from
function, and this unhurried stylistic change continued on even into the early
1300’s. In fact, it was men’s fashion
that first began to rapidly advance, with women’s fashion following years later.
“The design of fashionable clothes…
could first of all be seen as a formally interesting creative endeavor. But it
thereafter could become part of a generally profitable and differently creative
scheme of commercial design and even industrial production, without losing its
aesthetic honor” (Hollander, 27-28).
Thus clothing design developed as an art form in and of itself, but
began to be applied to real life: what people actually wear. Today, everyone is, in essence, wearing a work
of art that represents the individual. This
development of styles resulted in an ease of personal expression through ones
clothing.
Fashion can be
used to bring a group of people together to promote a beneficial group dynamic. Dress codes and uniforms take advantage of
this particular trait. Strict rules such
as these take away individual students’ flair while at the same time making
them feel like a cohesive group.
Uniforms can create solidarity as well, bringing co-workers together
with a sense of community, family and similar situations (Miller, 12). When people wear similar outfits, they feel a
sense of camaraderie, which makes allows them to work in a more unified
manner. According to Miller, “equality
may imply uniformity, even uniforms, such as the Mao suit in China or the use
of school uniforms to mute class differences among students” (8).This takes
away the prominent display of any differences that may cause animosity between people. This may help employers create a cohesive,
efficient, and productive atmosphere for the business or organization.
Although they are sometimes
used to better a group, uniforms can be used as a tool for degradation. “The uniform acts as a sign that we should
not or need not treat someone as a human being, and that they need not and
should not treat us as one” (Miller, 12).
Once someone puts on a uniform, they are no longer vividly displaying
their own personality, so others no longer see them for their
individuality. Rather, they see them for
their uniform: just another worker, student, etc. From waitresses to lawyers, from inmates to
prison guards, and from students to teachers, this phenomenon can be seen
throughout culture where people are treated differently based solely on their
clothing.
Attire has been
used as a tool to control natives in imperial endeavors. “Comaroff & Comaroff (1997) view clothing
as central to missionary conversion in the early nineteenth century in
Bechuanaland, a frontier region between colonial Botswana and South Africa” (Hansen,
375). The group benefitting traits of
clothing helped the missionaries to make the natives feel more cohesive with
the newcomers. This was important to
minimize animosity between the two distinct groups that frequently surfaced in times
of tension. Also, in order to impart
western culture upon the native Africans, “colonial administration[s]…
introduced [the] uniform made of Khaki, which… were originally imported
from India, and forced on Africans” (Oyeniyi, 16). This not only provided an outfit to unify,
but also one to de-individualize.
The style of a
person’s clothing is a representation of how much power they have. In the past, many men in power “had worn
gaudy clothes to display their rank and hide their personal failings”
(Hollander, 31). This overelaborate
clothing not only gave the powerful wearer a sense of security and authority,
but it also sent a message to his peers, counterparts, and subjects that he was
powerful regardless of what weaknesses he may have. His flaws became obscured by what he was
wearing and what message that sent. Thus
his clothing liberated him from the confines of his own inadequacies, allowing
him to move beyond them and realize his full potential. For example, in Yorubaland, a cultural region
of Africa near Nigeria, “Obas [political heads], chiefs and notable individuals…
are usually clad in dresses that reflect their positions, statuses, and wealth.
The commoners, in the same vein, also dress to reflect their stations in life”
(Oyeniyi, 4). Clothing more clearly
defines class and power to the observer, showing not only what they are but
also what they want to be perceived as.
Free speech is
oftentimes exercised through empowering attire.
In the United States, everyone has the right to express themselves through
free speech, though there are many methods of doing so. Clothing, as a representation of an
individual’s personality, is an extremely effective and frequently utilized
form of free speech. In courts around
the country, cases associated with expression through apparel have come up,
most notably in cases associated with school dress codes. For example, in the Supreme Court case Tinker vs. Des Moines, students wore
armbands protesting the government’s policy in Vietnam to school. The school wanted them to take the armbands
off, but the students took the school to court where eventually, they won (Tedford). In “The
Language of Clothes, Alison Lurie contends: ‘Fashion is free speech, and
one of the privileges, if not always one of the pleasures of a free world’”
(Miller, 7). Thus, everyone, every day,
engages in asserting their power of free speech through clothing.
Fashion
wields power: to some degree a force of oppression and to some degree a guiding
influence. It has the power to make
people follow it whether or not they realize it is happening. According to Georg Simmel, “it would seem as
though fashion were desirous of exhibiting its power by getting us to adopt the
most atrocious things for its sake alone” (544). Fashion, or the popular fashion, flows and morphs
based upon the current popular style, convenience, and many other factors. Everyone pays attention to and reflects this
to some degree, even if that is by actively ignoring it or shunning it. However, from the viewpoint of Bjorn
Schiermer, “we do not choose to follow fashion,” (96) people are simply
influenced without consent or knowledge and without being able to do anything
about it. Everyone is not only
influenced by this ambiguous thing that is fashion, but also by the people
around each individual. Then, these people are in turn influenced by
many people and what they wear. “So the
idea that ‘I dress solely for myself’ is for the most part illusory; one
expresses one's ‘individuality’ only by referring in self-presentation to those
groups and role models with which one identifies, and by choosing among
pre-existing styles” (Miller, 10). Everyone
is constantly evaluating other people’s styles and interpreting them to reflect
back on their own personal sense of style.
These effects in some ways take away
individuality while demonstrating another power authority: fashion.
CONCLUSIONS
Fashion
acts as both a force that brings people together and separates them apart. As a form of art and scientific study,
clothing stands out as something that affects everyone’s lives, reflecting
social strength and influencing power in many profound ways. There are three primary ways that fashion is
related to power: clothing as a representation of power, fashion as a controlling
force, and apparel as a device to control or liberate.
CLOTHING
AS A REPRESENTATION OF POWER
Fashion
is a prime exemplification of power within society. From uniforms to a fancy ball gown, every
article of clothing sends a message to the people around every individual about
who they are, what they do, or how powerful they are. People dress every day based upon a whole
range of factors: where they are going (from a job to a party), how the
clothing makes them feel, and what other people will think of it. This accumulation of personality, needs, and
wants results in an outfit that represents every individual’s personal power
for that particular day. This is not
only their position in society, but also how powerful they themselves are
feeling that day. Whether people
consciously realize it or not, everyone puts their personal power levels into
what they wear from day to day and in general.
The way that people represent power through their clothing influences
how every other individual treats them.
Rather than treating someone based upon who they are, they treat them
based upon what they have inferred from what they are wearing. What they are wearing is not a reliable
representation of what class they are from and yet everyone judges them based
upon that small bit of information: their clothing.
FASHION
AS A CONTROLLING FORCE
Not
only does fashion represent power, but it also, to some extent, drives
itself. It is made up of individual
styles from across the world: mainly the popular styles which are, in turn,
influenced by smaller movements. Each
style integrates with one another and forms new sub-style, which then build off
what has already and not yet been done in order to find something that is new. This results in a conglomeration of the styles
of everyone in the world and of a region. This constant evolution is not only driven by
each of these styles, but also by people in fashion, sometimes the rich,
sometimes the poor, from all aspects of the world and economy. Fashion, as a force of its own, draws
followers to it – people who want what that fashion represents will do whatever
necessary to get it. Fashion controls
what people wear directly, influencing their style and using their style to
influence others’. This can oftentimes
create problems when people either do not realize that they are following
fashion or mindlessly follow it. But at
the same time, it creates a lively healthy fashion culture, one that includes
all people, all styles, all around the world and is beneficial to all
surrounding it. Regardless, fashion can
control people, whether or not they know it.
USING
APPAREL TO CONTROL OR LIBERATE
In addition to
being a controlling force, fashion is a powerful tool that can be used to both govern
and free people. Due to clothing’s
individualizing and de-individualizing factors, it can be used in many ways to
take advantage of these assets. Group
dynamics are strongly influenced by what each member wears, making them act
more cohesively or as disjoint individuals.
Thus, fashion can be used to impose forcibly impose a sense of
camaraderie. However, it can also be a
tool to liberate oneself by expressing individual personality. The efficacy of clothing as a tool is
something that people do not always realize is occurring or is useful. Since fashion is a tool that can be used in
such intense ways, it is vital to be aware of it and to learn how to use it
properly.
Fashion permeates
every aspect of everyone’s lives, all throughout them. It has a multi-dimensional relationship with
power that influences people in many ways.
Clothing is not only a guiding force, but also an instrument through
which cultures are represented and people can be both freed and
controlled.
Works Cited
Hansen, Karen T. "The World in Dress:
Anthropological Perspectives on Clothing, Fashion, and Culture." Annual
Review of Anthropology 33 (2004): 369-92. JSTOR. Web. 15 Feb. 2013.
Hollander, Anne. "The Modernization
of Fashion." Design Quarterly 154 (1992): 27-33. JSTOR. Web.
14 Feb. 2013.
Lowe, John W G, and Elizabeth D. Lowe.
"Cultural Pattern and Process: A Study of Stylistic Change in Women's
Dress." American Anthropologist ns 84.3 (1982): 521-44. JSTOR.
Web. 12 Mar. 2013.
Miller, Joshua I. "Fashion and
Democratic Relationships." Palgrave Macmillan Journals 37.1 (2005):
3-23. JSTOR. Web. 13 Feb. 2013.
Oyeniyi, Bukola A. "Conceptualizing
Dress and Identity in Yorubaland." Dress and Identity in Yorubaland,
1880-1980. N.p.: n.p., 2012. 1-40. Leiden University Repository.
Web. 3 Apr. 2013.
<https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/20143/01.pdf?sequence=5>.
Schiermer, Bjorn. "Fashion Victims:
On the Individualizing and De-Individualizing Powers of Fashion." Fashion
Theory 14.1 (2010): 83-104. Academic Search Premier. Web. 14 Feb.
2013.
Simmel, Georg. "Fashion." American
Journal of Sociology 62.6 (1957): 541-58. JSTOR. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.
Tedford, Thomas L., and Dale A. Herbeck.
"Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969)." Tinker v. Des
Moines School District (1969). Strata Publishing, 2009. Web. 16 Apr. 2013.
Project Reflection:
1. What
part of your paper, argument, or efforts are you most proud?
I am most proud of the research that has gone into my
paper. When I first began this project,
I was unsure as to how much evidence I could find to support my argument, or
even if I could construct any kind of viable argument. However, when I began researching, I found a
plethora of sources related to my topic from many different angles and
origins. I learned so incredibly much
about fashion and how important it is to so many aspects of culture that I had
no idea about before. I love how I
learned so much and was able to translate that research to a cohesive argument and
paper.
2. What
was the biggest struggle for you over the course of Senior Project?
The biggest struggle for me in creating this paper was
simply giving myself direction. I knew
that I wanted to do something related to fashion, but I was lost as to the
specifics due to the fact that I didn’t know much about analysis of
fashion. My Senior Project Advisor,
Jessica McCallum, helped me to come up with my direction: fashion in relation
to power. However, even after that I was
struggling to fully develop my argument.
It was only when I completed writing my paper that I discovered exactly
what it was about. This was definitely a
challenge, but I think that my argument turned out strong in the end.
3. What
has been the biggest ‘takeaway’ from Senior Project? What is the most valuable
thing you have learned, skill you applied/developed, or the most helpful aspect
you cultivated over the course of the project?
This Senior Project was the most in-depth research project I
have done throughout my time at Animas High School. Because of this, my research skills have
greatly improved. In addition, I believe
that my writing is now much better quality due to the amount of revisions that
this paper has undergone. However, beyond
my skill development, I think that the most important thing that I have taken
away from this project is what I have learned about an area of strong interest
to me: fashion. Previously, I had been
primarily interested in the aesthetic aspect – designing and creating. But now, I know so much more about how
clothing styles have developed and how they interact with power. This project was very beneficial to
developing my personal interests.
Animas High School Mock Senate
In this project, our entire senior class conducted a Mock Senate where we looked at two issues: immigration and the fiscal cliff. I represented Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader, so I guided the Senate through bill reading, structured debate, caucuses, and voting on amendments and bills.
Obama: A Stronger Candidate
This election is imperative to determining our country’s
trajectory and success in the recession recovery. Republican candidate Mitt Romney and current
democratic president Barack Obama have legitimate plans to grow the economy, but the
methodologies are vastly dissimilar and
not equally effective. While Romney has
an aggressive economic plan, the best candidate for America’s future is President
Obama who has taken a harder line on campaign finance, fought to prevent a
nuclear Iran, and developed a realistic solution for the debt crisis.
The president has stood up for the reform of campaign
finance when Mitt Romney would simply leave powerful political organizations
unaccountable for their actions and contributors. The policies governing contributions used to
be far stricter, but over the years case law has expanded what is allowed as
organizations, candidates, and parties have found ways around the laws. There are many workarounds developed over the
years including: “Soft money,” 527s, and most recently, Political Action Committees
(Super PACs), independent organizations that can pool money and spend it in
support of a candidate. As it stands
currently, the Super PACs do not have contribution limits, so the possibility
of one organization or individual having an excessive amount of sway in the
political process is high. The Democracy
Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections Act (DISCLOSE Act)
would require the Super PACs to release information specifying who their donors
are, resulting in more accountability to the organizations and candidates. (Elliott) Obama
supports this bill, but Governor Romney has not stated whether he would,
although his running mate Paul Ryan opposes it.
Regardless, money from Political Action Committees made a dramatically
larger dent in Romney’s campaign finances than Obama’s: a difference of over
$953 million.
(2012 Presidential Finance) Obama
has even said that he would work towards a constitutional amendment to overturn
a deciding campaign finance supreme court case whereas Romney is in support of
removing regulations. Although Obama has
not made many of changes besides supporting the DISCLOSE Act, a Romney
administration would simply make the problem worse, rolling back donation
restrictions leaving Super PACs and candidates open to corruption.
Mitt Romney stands to benefit more from the
de-regulation of campaign finance than Obama due to the demographic of his
voter base. Although the President has
pulled in more money overall than Romney over the course of the race, the
actual numbers break down in a revealing way.
From individual donations in increments less than $200 to his campaign, Obama
received $354 million, but Romney only pulled in $78 million. However, looking at the other end of the
spectrum, donations of $2000 and over, Obama only received $92 million where
Romney received $170. (2012 Presidential Finance )
Because the governor has wealthier
supporters, if campaign contribution limits increased so would donations
to his campaign.
Although gradual and measured, the outcome of Barack Obama’s
plan to cut the deficit is promising, while Romney’s plan is not. The Governor’s plan involves dramatic and
ambitious changes in spending and revenue.
He would withdraw funding from many government programs while lowering
tax rates and closing loopholes. (Elliott) However,
Romney would also increase spending on defense and has not released many of the
important details leaving the plan incalculable and vague. Obamas plan may take a while to come into
fruition, but it provides guaranteed steady efficacy by ensuring that federal
spending can be paid for using federal revenue.
According to CNN Money, “Over the next decade, Obama's budget would rack
up $6.4 trillion in deficits -- below the $10 trillion that would accrue if
today's policies were extended.” (Sahadi)
Thus, the President’s plan may not be the fastest but it will undoubtedly
cut the deficit steadily. Comparatively,
Romney is a wild card: his plan may get the job done, but his methodology is
unclear.
On our foreign policy regarding the prevention of a nuclear Iran,
Obama has a stronger track record and shows a confidence and determination not
seen in the other candidate. Romney has
changed his position on the issue multiple times throughout the campaign trail.
He spoke out against diplomatic talks
with Iran in 2007 and was again dismissive of a peaceful approach in his 2010
book, “No Apology”. The governor even
gave a message in the Wall Street Journal from his administration to Iran: “If
you want peace, prepare for war.” (Corasaniti, et al.) However, as recently as the final debate, Romney’s
stance reversed, claiming that he was actually in agreement with many of the
points Obama made. Even
the President noticed this: “there have been times… where it sounded like you
thought that you'd do the same things we did, but you'd say them louder and
somehow that would make a difference.” (Corasaniti, et al.)
The President’s administration has peacefully impeded Iran’s ability to obtain
a nuclear weapon. Sanctions have dramatically increased under
his direction, cutting at the heart of the Iranian economy: oil. Obama has also initiated and continued
programs to search for and sabotage the production of highly enriched
uranium. Diplomatic talks are also a key
element to the president’s plan, making attempts to work with Iran. Romney’s experience in foreign policy is not
very comprehensive and his plans are convoluted. The Governor has claimed he would use force or go to war
with Iran to prevent acquisition of nuclear weapons. However, Romney has also stated he would
rather use a peaceful diplomatic method, much like Obama is doing now. Conversely, the President is taking action as
he promised by increasing sanctions and sabotage programs. All the preventative measures we have
conducted so far have impeded Iran’s nuclear progress.
On many of the important issues in this election, Romney held
an inconsistent stance, put forth the same approaches as Obama, or
simply wouldn’t do anything. If the President
was re-elected, he would continue to take us in the right direction, making
rational decisions regarding campaign finance, the debt crisis, and nuclear
Iran.
1st Amendment Social Media Project
1st Amendment Blog Analysis
Our First Amendment rights are the most important to
exercise within our constitution. It
gives us our right to free speech, religion, assembly, press, and petition, all
of which we use on a daily basis whether we realize it or not. Although it can be inflammatory, the most
important application of our First Amendment rights for healthy democratic
discourse is during election season.
The Democratic National Convention marked one of the first
major pieces of political rhetoric with which I began exercising my First Amendment
rights. The convention in and of itself
is an exercise of the right to assemble, something that we don’t always realize
is important to the entire presidential race.
Protests and rallies are other examples of this right. As I wrote in my blogs, there are speeches in
the convention that also use free speech.
In Barack Obama’s speech, the use of “glittering generalities and
sentimental stories” (9/7/12), embellished his term in office because of his
First Amendment rights.
The right to petition is also important in the political
process in a variety of ways. Oftentimes
citizens or organizations will write letters or petitions to the government in
favor of their viewpoint, demanding change in policies or conduct. However, contrary to popular belief, these
petitions can actually make a difference.
This right paid off in the case of three New Jersey girls who wanted a
female debate moderator. They created a
petition, had it signed by 170,000 people, and it ended up influencing the
placement of two female reporters as moderators for the upcoming debates: Candy
Crowly and Martha Raddatz.
During the presidential and vice-presidential debates, we
see our First Amendment rights being used in a oftentimes inflammatory way. More of the subtleties of our protections
come out through the interpretation and re-interpretation of what the other
campaigner said or did. It is still free
speech when words are taken out of context and twisted to seem evil or
corrupt. A candidate can make
contradicting claims about his own campaign policies and his plans for
presidency, whether they are true or false: “If he [Biden] didn’t agree with something he would interject a
‘that’s not true’ or simply laugh” (10/11/12). These examples are protected under the First
Amendment because they do not harm anyone, are not libel or slander, and they
are considered political speech.
Out of all of these ways that we exercise our freedoms
during an election, the most important of them all is the expression of
personal opinions. It is liberating to blog
on pertinent topics such as the race, and to evaluate performances and the
constitutionality of things as I have been doing for the past month. I learned about all of the aforementioned
uses of the First Amendment and especially my own right to address them through
writing this blog. While my own
contribution to the discourse of a healthy democratic society may not reach
many people, it has shown the importance of our First Amendment rights in the
election process.
Nice! Love your 1st Amendment blog too.
ReplyDelete