In the beginning of the Harvey article, it was really made clear how many different disciplines leadership studies encapsulates. I am struggling to think of many situations in which there is no leader, in school, we have professors, in clubs we have presidents, in sports, we have a captain, etc. Leadership studies is really formed by looking at a variety of other disciplines and putting together what you can learn about ethical leadership from them, which I think is really cool because it provides us the opportunity to focus on such a variety of areas.

I thought that Harvey’s seven questions were an interesting way of thinking about leadership. My main takeaway from the article was how useful it is to be charismatic (something we talked a lot about in 101) and, related to that, the importance of communication. Towards the end of the article, Harvey really stressed how important it is for leaders to be able to clearly communicate identity, where they currently stand, where they are going, etc. It is important to be able to communicate this clearly for people to trust you as a leader and believe in the group’s plan. This reminded me of charisma because so much of charisma is related to your ability to communicate on a deep, emotional level with people. A charismatic would definitely be able to communicate well and that would help them be a good leader. I saw some of these same ideas in the Bezio article when she talked about the importance of a united people and a people that like their leader. A lot of this affection for a leader will come from their ability to communicate effectively.

Reading Michael Harvey’s book chapter, “Questioning leadership: an integrative model,” brought back what I learned in Leadership and the Humanities and tied together with the ethical issues we’ve considered in this course. I have to agree with scholar Ron Riggio that, although the field of leadership studies is an emerging discipline, the importance of it lies in the “underlying unity of focus” (Harvey, 200). One of the most interesting aspects of the Jepson School and why it appealed to me so much as a student was its unity– despite the different specialties of each professor. I have had professors in Jepson with PhD’s in Philosophy, Psychology, English (Dr. Bezio!), Economics, and History, yet they all teach under one roof and collaborate with each other on research and other projects. As Harvey discusses, it is imperative “we can get the different disciplines within leadership studies to talk with each other,” in order to fully understand leadership (201). And, with these different interests and disciplines, we can define leadership from many different angles. I also liked that Harvey addressed that, although times have changed– where people are members of more social groups– the “basic equation of what groups need” still applies. This made me think of our class discussion today in rewriting narratives and telling stories– although leaders look different than they did centuries ago, the basic premises still apply.

I really enjoyed how the author included cultural and historical examples with each leadership question he posed. This helped me to better conceptualize the implications each question has within leadership. These anecdotal examples are exactly what we need to fully understand leadership, as it “must learn about the group’s history and culture, the environment it operates in, and its condition and effectiveness” (213). We can apply this knowledge while understanding business hierarchies such as Toyota or even the hierarchy of a public education committee. I really enjoyed reading each rhetorical question within these broader examples.

Anna Marston

I think that these readings truly show us the dangers of whitewashing history. I know that for me personally, the Zimm reading was especially difficult to get through. When I first learned about Christopher Columbus in elementary school, we learned about how he was a hero. He discovered new uncharted territory, and in our minds became one of the greatest explorers of all time. However, as time went on, more and more pieces are added onto our original story until that narrative from elementary school is almost completely gone. As reality sets in and our preconceived notions are challenged, we no longer have the same mindset as we did originally. Christopher Columbus is not the hero we were told he was, and there shouldn’t be a day celebrating him after all the atrocities that happened under his leadership. But why were we told he was a hero in the first place?

The example of Christopher Columbus is not the only story that gets treated this way. It makes me wonder why we whitewash events for kids so much that we tell them something that is (largely) factually incorrect? I understand that some kids are too young for some of the more traumatic events in history, and I agree that some topics should be introduced more gradually as time goes on and people get more mature. However, I strongly disagree with the idea that at such a young age, we should be told versions of the story that are not even close to the reality of it. Words impact us so much more than we realize, and especially at such young and impressionable ages, I don’t think we should be given false information, especially for stories of that magnitude and beyond.

This reading assignment for me personally was very tough to stomach. I knew that Columbus was not the person who founded the Americas but rather it was Native Americans who lived there way before he discovered it. However, I was not aware of the sequence of events that took place after he landed in the Americas. Columbus was directed by his government to find Asia and bring back gold from there. He, however, landed in the Americas and came upon Native Americans. Within his time traveling back and forth between Spain and the America’s he enslaved thousands of Native Americans for Spanish use,  allowed his soldiers to torture, mutilate, and kill hundreds of thousands of Native Americans resulting in over 250,000 of their deaths (a genocide) completely decimating their population. The part that truly disgusted me was they enslaved these Native Americans to find gold on their own island and if they reached their quota they were given a ring to place around their neck. However, if they didn’t reach their quota their hands were chopped off and they bled to death.

I feel as though our education system has failed not only myself but millions of other students who were made unaware of Columbus’s acts of genocide. In elementary school, we were taught that Columbus was this happy go lucky guy who founded the Americas. We were only taught his accomplishments and were never presented all of the horrific things he and his soldiers did to the Native Americans. I feel as though this is a re-occurring theme such as our founding fathers who again were presented to us as the men who made America into the great country it is today and because of them we are a free nation able to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However, what we again were not taught is that these men did not believe these rights belonged to African Americans and they bought as well as traded slaves. Another example are pilgrims who are shown to us in school peacefully and pleasantly having Thanksgiving dinner with the Native Americans. Where in actuality they too committed acts of genocide against Native Americans and brought disease to them killing thousands. Their peace was purely from a political standpoint.

“There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” ― Howard Zinn

The Canary not        American plumped          wings plummeted perched to speak 

mended shut with barbwire       from a world              who would rather   

slit the black                birds throat and           tear out one of the Canaries bird

Box                               than to admit guilt                      to the shameless slaughtering

“detox”. All         sounds songs                     souls mimicked the monotonous

melodious feigning         of a falsified nation      who trapped the migrant 

birds who dare travel                             across the borders             stole 

their eggs              hovering hatching             birthing them as their own Dam

ned creations                     eggs mothered by a land                         who could never sorrow

their sadness.                       Oh Great Green pheasant                             the duped enemy 

dumped in “cages” scattered  around   dusted dried                   deserted          

desert ground              Oh how I hear your cawing             in the cebrals     of 

my mind.              The mighty thunderbird supernatural                  suffers a wobbled

wounded knee.       A massacre   masqueraded in the           bellowing buzzing    

battle Trumpets     that provided   the beat that bathed the                     birds, in blood of mass 

Extinction.   The american canary                    with yellowed patriotic blissness       sings the 

melodious                                    falsities of a nation borne from                             Silence                                                                              

being forced                              down the beaks of every bird           who wasn’t feathered                                              

in the purity of                                                                                                                          white.

I wrote this poem last year to speak upon the way that America handles its “problems” or rather the people it wishes not to have inside it’s country. The poem represents the Indians and indegenous people that we slaughtered, the immigrants that we have stereotyped and the Japenses Americans we unjustly imprisoned during WWII. We are a land that was built on the blood and enslavement of others. This is never more evident than looking at the diary of Christopher Columbus. It makes you question what we find ethical in the name of success and conquest?

One of the main conclusions of the Zinn reading that was surprising, and made me uncomfortable, was the argument that the bloodshed and genocide committed in the Americas might be necessary for the drive to civilization. What particularly made me uncomfortable was the comparisons first to the Soviet use of peasant camps and then to the fire bombings of Germany and Japan during World War 2. The problem is all of these are completely different situations.

For example, the genocide and enslavement of native Americans in the Americas by Europe wasn’t done with the goal of civilizing or bettering the Americas. It was done with the goal of enriching Europe with the resources and wealth found in said new territories. Then there’s the Soviet work camps and the killing of peasants. The problem is neither the work camps nor the killing of peasants was done to industrialize the Soviet Union. Rather, they were punishment to help Stalin solidify control of his regime. And then the fire bombings of Germany and Japan just fall off the wagon entirely. These were tactics of war by a foreign power in order to win, not to bring civilization or industrialization. These examples used by the writer are odd, and do little if anything to prove their point.

I found the Zinn reading particularly interesting because I often find myself flip flopping on the debate about celebrating Columbus Day. On one hand, we have to credit a large portion of the discovery and and establishment of the Americas to Columbus, which is a pretty important feat. But on the other hand, glorifying somebody who enslaved, raped, and killed natives is obviously not what we want to do. Unfortunately, this trend continued for too long once the states were established. The treatment of Native Americans is one of the most atrocious, yet under recognized doings in our country’s history. The over-simplification of the story of Columbus makes me wonder how many other people I have glorified and celebrated without being told their entire story. I believe people neglect to tell these parts of the stories in order to “save face” and portray a good image of their country. A similar situation is one that takes place right in Richmond on Monument Ave. Although I don’t think removing the status is the answer, I do think the addition of plaques or other statues to tell the other part of the story that Is neglected is necessary.

Personally, this reading made me upset. It’s really sad to read about all the horrific things that were done to the natives. The natives were nothing but nice to the colonizers and they took completely took advantage of them. To see that they murdered millions of people and destroyed cultures all because they wanted to is disgusting. It makes me wonder a lot about the nature of white people. It also makes me wonder about religion. Colonizers use religion to justify almost every genocide that they commit which makes me question the purpose of religion. I also thought about how today the media calls certain Muslim groups terrorists for simply doing what the colonizers did. I think religion can be very dangerous and is used when people have no real answer for the terrible crimes they commit.

I think the second article was really interesting. I had no idea that the African Americans were so present in the government during this time. Although, I’m not surprised. History hs a tendency to be whitewashed but I think It’s very important that children are taught this so those little black children aren’t discouraged. It is beneficial to have role models that look like you.

I thought that the Zinn reading was really interesting. It brought across some interesting topics on historical events and how we should view them. In my history classes in high school, I was taught and had always known to some degree that Columbus was evil but I had never learned all of the specifics and the extent of the harm he did until now after reading this article. Reading the horrible history between the Europeans’ invasions of the native’s land and the malicious killings and burning of their crops and villages was very appalling.

It actually is crazy how we are not taught more about the evils that Columbus inflicted on the indigenous people. In one section of the reading it mentioned that by 1650 there were no more Arawaks or their descendants left on the islands because they had all been captured and killed. It is time for our educational systems to stop whitewashing the history and teach the truth about the colonization of the Americas and we should also eradicate Columbus Day.

I thought that the Zinn reading was extremely interesting. I have enjoyed learning about how history that we learn in middle school is almost never what actually occurred in my 101 class and again with this reading. I had always known to some degree that Columbus was not good to the native people and brought diseases to the new world, but I did not know the extent or the back story to his actions. I thought that it was so interesting to learn that Columbus completely over exaggerated what he had found to King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella so that they could give him a bigger fleet for his next journey. Not that his actions are justifiable at all, I this that it is fascinating that Columbus was put under so much pressure to please the king and that is why “he committed irreparable crimes against the Indians” (6). I also thought that it was not surprising how Columbus and his team were only concerned with the riches and honor that they could bring back to Spain and did not think about the long-term consequences at all.

This reading made me think about a documentary I recently had to watch for my justice class called “Harvest of Empire”. This documentary was about how the US interfered with South American countries only because it would help our economy or bring money into businesses that we supported. The documentary highlights how the US did not care at all about what they were doing to the nation’s governments would impact the native people living there. I thought that there were a lot of connections between the documentary and the Zinn reading because they both deal with looking at people who will do just to preserve and gain power and riches. I also saw so many similarities in the way that there was complete disregard for the native people of the nations that the US and Columbus were invading. This really makes me wonder why we still celebrate Columbus Day in the US when there is so much about how he was actually an awful person. Also, this makes me think about how every American grows up with a very idealistic vision of US history but in reality it is mainly fake to make the US look much better than it actually is.