Whoa! A
PANDA with TWO TEDDY BEARS! But wait, what exactly are the teddy bears’ names?
I chose this political cartoon because pandas are my favorite animal. Not only
that but this picture is so true. As citizens of the United States of America,
we do not have many things in America in which they are actually made in
America. Look at the tag of your shirt, for example, where does it come from? A
lot of the time, it’s not made in the United States. What about your pencil or
pen; probably made in China. The United States is in a national debt; our
government owes about $16 trillion dollars to other countries in the world like
China. I took from the image that basically the big “mama” bear owns the little
tiny “baby” bears. In actuality, we are owned by China because of how much
business we do with them on a daily basis. We owe China so much money that they
could probably be our “mamas” and own us, Americans. The author of this
political cartoon got their message across very easily, I understood it the
minute I saw the cartoon. The picture is funny, but it is also scary in the
fact that it has so much truth in it is unbelievable.
This
image containing the pandas and teddy bears is also very oppressive. When
someone thinks of a panda, they think of bamboo, when they think of bamboo,
they think of China; China equals Pandas. The author used the stereotype of a
panda with China and teddy bears for the United States because, like previously
mentioned, China or the panda is our owners.
The image was created by inferred text in an image because that is what
a political cartoon is, an image which is inferred to be about something else. The
stereotype of pandas and China is what makes it oppressive, in our discussion
about oppressions, it was stated not to use stereotypes; this image shows
stereotypes which is oppression.
Since
this image is a political cartoon, the author has to have added some humor to
it. By using the stereotypes of China with pandas and making the United States
and European Union as teddy bears, it creates humor and meaning. It would not
mean as much without that oppression. The oppression shows character by
relating it to something everyone has experienced and combined it with
something we, as Americans, all know about or need to acknowledge. I felt that
this language helped greatly with understanding the political cartoon as a
whole. It created the image of great big China mama panda bear taking care of
little baby United States and European Union. We depend of mama China, without
her, we would not have half the exported items we do now.
Word Count: 467
Priyanka Bhakta
Priyanka, I totally agree with what you are saying. The cartoon is very funny but yet it is very true. The United States does not make anything for themselves any more. We depend on other countries to make everything for us, but why? We are very capable of doing these jobs here in the United States. It would also help keep us out of debt and increase the number of jobs available. We are whether people like to admit it or not "owned" by China. I completely agree with you that the author did make this cartoon kind of funny. When I think of China one of the first things I think of is panda bears. I can understand why the author chose the panda bear. The one thing I do not understand is why would we pay other countries to make our products? Why don't we help ourselves for once? The reason that China own's us is because we made it that way. If it wasn't for the United States, China wouldn't have a lot of their wealth and jobs. The catoon stated everything we need to know, but why do we make it this way.
ReplyDeleteWord Count-200
OH! I almost forgot. I got my image from http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/b0e7d3e0-38bd-4bfb-a556-edb328741ac1.html
ReplyDeleteI agree with everything you said in your posts. The picture that you chose just really stood out to me, and it caught my eye. Maybe because they used something as simple as teddy bears? But, you are right. The photo is very humerous, yet very true. You did a really good job in explaining what it was saying in detail and not just briefly summarizing it. Like how you made the bamboo connection, that might have been a detail that was easy for anyone to notice, but I didn't pick up on it until you brought it up in the summary. Your wording made it easier to understand for dummies like me that don't understand politics a whole lot. I think we rely on other countries to make products for us way to much. We are capable of making our own, so why don't we? Why go straight to them?
ReplyDeleteMakayla