Journal 4 -Megan Russell

In section XVII Berry discusses how some people would more willingly surrender some of their Constitutional rights for expansion of safety measures and vice versa. This section impacted me most because I find this issue very important. The idea of giving up some freedoms for safety is somewhat reasonable but could end with the loss of too many freedoms. The balance between freedom and safety is hard to maintain. A perfect example of this is the safety measures now taken in airports. The new metal detectors are full body scans. People say this violates their rights because they are being forced to go in a scanner that exposes them. I think this is a reasonable safety precaution. In airports made people strip down all their clothes and then stand in a scanner that would be extremely unreasonable. The previous scenario is of off the extreme but its effective in showing what would definitely be considered too much of a violation of rights. We should surrender some of our freedom for safety, but only to the point where it doesn’t completely change our lives.

I find that Berry’s problem solution approach is very effective in persuading readers to agree with his argument. When Berry discusses how people are ignorant of what toxins are being used in production and how they are being disposed, he paints such a vivid and unpleasant picture. He might as well out right say that people are stupid if they think it’s a good idea to obtain foreign products though importation. These strong emotion appeals are very effective in persuading an average American, but I find this as a weakness as well. He uses no facts or statistics to support his ideas for what should be a solution. I he really wants to solidify his arguments, he need the data to back himself up.

 
Subsistence
1. the action or fact of maintaining or supporting oneself at a minimum level
2. the state of remaining in force or effect
3. denoting or relating to production at a level sufficient only for one's own use or consumption, without any surplus for trade

This word explains what Berry is suggesting, that American should not import things that can be locally grown or made and should not export until all American’s needs are met. This idea seems good, dealing less with foreign states and focusing on the local nation can be safer, but it does not promote a competition economy. America is on the top one the most competitive nation because of its economy. People may say that America’s economy is in peril with all the unemployment and debt. These are legitimate problems, but this does not mean that America should not promote a capitol economy and the chance for private companies to thrive. The principle of subsistence is a great idea if we lived in a perfect would, but to maintain that international number one position, American needs to stay competitive though imports and exports.
 
This essay is showing a very bias and one-sided argument. If you look throughout Berry’s essay, you will notice that there are no statistics. The strongest argument must not be based on opinion, but clear hard facts and statistics. I find that people cannot always rely on essays due theirs biases. I found a link to the Bureau of Labor Statistic. This sight list the statistics for anything, unemployment, US import prices, employment costs, etc. I suggest to look through the statistics and then develop your opinion on the best way for American to proceed socially, economically, and militarily.

http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm