The Sharon Statement

The Sharon Statement (1960) Young Americans For Freedom (YAF)
The Young Americans for Freedom felt so much differently than the government did about international communism. They felt that international communism was a great threat and that it should be destroyed in any way possible. They felt that it would destroy the political and economic liberty of the nation and in turn that would have an affect on democracies across the country. Free market would be in jeopardy which would then put the peoples needs and freedom at risk. The government did not feel this way, but they felt that international communism should exist.
When you read the Sharon Statement you seem to get a feeling of how the young conservatives understand freedom. The young conservatives understood freedom in all different aspects that was spoken about in this statement. They understood that there could not be any political freedom without economic freedom. The young conservatives concluded that free will was God given and that it takes away a mans right to be free from the limitations of individual judgement. The young conservatives also believed that the purpose of the government and the leader of the government was to protect the economic and political freedoms of others by preserving the internal order, the provision of national defense and the administration of justice. They felt that were certain limitations on things that there shouldn’t be limitations on such as when and how much someone should get paid. They speak of the genius of the constitution and how it doesn’t specifically give all the power to the federal government but instead gives some to the states or the people. The young conservatives talk of how they feel that the market economy is the most productive supplier of the needs of the people. The market economy, to the young conservatives, is what the economy moral and physical strength. Lastly their way of understanding freedom is that communism should not exist but should be conquered.
Port Huron Statement (1962) Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)
The features of the American Society that seem to trouble the authors of this statement the most had to do with the standing of America. What that means is that they didn’t feel that America was for the people. They felt that the American values had been blemished and they needed to be fixed. The features that seemed to trouble them the most were the economic, social and political features.
I would define the phrase “a democracy of individual participation” as everyone in a society or a democracy being involved in all political decisions that are made, especially decisions concerning them and their way of living. Every individual should have a voice and an opinion, and the government should not have all the power. This would not only give them a voice but give some sort of power so that the decisions will be split between the democracy and the government. This would also bring out the individuals that are keeping themselves away from others and in isolation. This will give them a chance to be involved in the decisions as well.
Pablo Guzman, The Young Lords
There were many objectives that the Young Lords wanted to follow for all Puerto Ricans, Mexicans and Latinos. The Young Lords wanted control of their community, their land and their institutions such as hospitals and many other institutions because they wanted to cater to the needs of the people. They wanted control of all hospitals, schools, churches, law enforcement and even welfare. They also to protect their land and stop it from being attacked by different corporations trying to bring different things such as highways. When a person hears the name Young Lords they may automatically think negative but that is the total opposite of what they really were. They wanted to make a positive change for the community and they wanted to change their way of living to better living for themselves and the people.
Pablo Guzman (Paul Guzman) was a member of the Young Lords who was a member of the gang for 6 years. Mentioned in the reading, the Young Lords were a positive gang that wanted to make living in their community better for themselves and the people. Guzman speaks of many things in the reading and one of the many things he spoke about was the motto that they lived by which means “I have Puerto Rico in my heart” in English. At some point with his time as a member of the Young Lords Guzman went to jail where he met a young man that helped him name Gerry Rivera. Gerry was a man that helped the Young Lords by stepping up and defending the charge of no Latino representation. In his heart he knew he wanted to be a member, but he did not fit the part so instead he sat on the sidelines and watched the things that went on in the community. Although he did not become a member of the Young Lords he did go on to receive a scholarship from the school of Columbia and went on to follow a career in TV. After 6 years the Young Lords were coming to an end and the cause was mainly because of government entry and incapability to function due to arrest. The other reasons are because of the youngness of the member and their vulnerability to make mistakes and betrayal. The Young Lords were over but before being dissolved they left a mark on their community by doing many things such as building a new hospital and forcing the city to use the lead-poisoning and tuberculosis tests gathering dust in a basement, and even encouraging schools to teach Puerto Rican history.
Cesar Chavez, Toward Mexican American Civil Rights
The NFWA was an association that was formed by Cesar Chavez to protect minorities or Mexican workers from unfair and unequal working conditions. Chavez felt as though these workers were not being protected and he felt that the landowners weren’t doing enough to protect their workers either. The Civil Rights movement was a movement started by Martin Luther King Jr. His mission was to fight for African Americans that he felt were being treated unfairly and unjustly. These 2 movements have many things in common but the one similarity that sticks out the most is that the both took a non-violent approach. Both movements also used marches and boycotts to get their message to the ones that they felt were treating the workers or individuals unfairly. Both movements wanted justice, equality and fairness for the individuals that are being represented. The leaders of the 2 movements relied on volunteers and individuals from the public to help them in their mission. There are also several differences between the 2 movements. While King fought for voting and citizenship rights for African Americans, Chavez fought for the fairness and equality of farmers. King did not use strikes our fast during his movement, but Chavez did, and this was met with violence directly from the landowners. In the end both movements wanted the same things which were justice, fairness and equality.