Both Pike’s Wild People in Wild Lands and Strong’s The Anglo Saxons and the World’s Future elaborate on the use of stereotypes throughout history and in works to demoralize people and things we don’t understand. Both articles look at this aspect from the perspective of Anglo-Saxon’s and how their poor views of Latin Americans has perverted historical views on them as a whole. This can be seen through out the entirety of Strong’s article as his piece reads as homage to Anglo-Saxons and everything they’ve done while simultaneously backhanding Latin Americans and their struggles. Pike’s article helps to serve as a blueprint for where scholars like Strong draw their inspiration and beliefs from. At the end of the day both are summaries of how historical and cultural views of the silent minority can be tainted and smeared because of the use and enforcement of stereotypes due to a lack of awareness.

The main argument of Frederick Pike’s article “Wild People in Wild Lands” is that the use of stereotypes, whether by the opressed or the opressor, leads to a cycle of demonization that becomes normalized in society. Using this idea, Josiah Strong’s piece, “The Anglo-Saxon and the World’s Future” can be seen in a different light. Although the colonial themes of the piece are evident right off the bat, the stereotype of the “nobelest races [the Germans and the Anglo-Saxons, specifically the English, the British Colonists, and the people of the United States]… always [being] lovers of liberty.” Analyzing it through Pike’s idea of stereotypes allows for a fresch glance at old ideas; specifically, the idea of “civilzation” versus “primitiveness” that pervades the history of colonization.

Although the articles at first seem unlinked beyond the idea of sterotypes – Pike’s is about Latin America and Strong’s is about the Anglo-Saxons – they are really just approaching the same problem from different viewpoints, from different times. Pike writes about the issues of stereotyping Latin American peoples after the fact, as someone who sees this practice as wrong. Strong, on the other hand, is writing in the moment, as someone who has fallen prey to these ideas of stereotyping that have put the white man above the Latinx.

Pike’s Wild People in Wild Lands and Strong’s The Anglo-Saxon and the World’s Future both center around very opinionated claims of Anglo-Saxons and the named or unnamed other. In Pike’s case, stereotyping is his focus as he discusses how every group has a set of stereotypes by which they judge other groups of people. He discusses how one group is seen as better, and that this “asymmetrical” relationship provides the ability to the “lesser” group to defame the better. Through the publication of his study, he hopes to show that Latinos have been equally “bigoted, extreme, irrational, and self-serving” in belittling North Americans, as North Americans have been to Latinos. This is an extremely strong statement, and he follows through by providing instances of 19th-century stereotyping that has continued into modern times, and listing the common stereotypes that many Americans hold of Latinos. These include “sexual abandon,” and profuse alcoholism. While citing evidence that these images are not completely unfounded, Pike ends by saying that many Americans have never traveled to Latin America, and therefore, are more likely to have pinned these stereotypes on the Latinos from travel accounts of others, which may or may not be truthful. Strong’s argument focuses more on what creates a successful society, which he claims are the two defining traits of Anglo-Saxon morality: “civil liberty” and “pure ‘spiritual’ Christianity.” He continues by stating that in order to compete with the advancement of Anglo-Saxon society, other societies must adapt and most likely adopt some aspects of Anglo-Saxon societies. Their arguments are not similar in evidence, but rather in the underlying point they make about Latin American societies needing to better themselves by standards set by Anglo-Saxon, or North American (named the “great home of Anglo-Saxons by Strong) population. Pike and Strong’s arguments are quite opinionated in that there is little room for counterargument, and very little, if any, is provided in either piece.

Both Pike’s Wild People in Wild Lands and Strong’s The Anglo Saxons and the World’s Future make very bold statements and claims. In Wild People in Wild Lands, Pike first introduces his work by stating that people use stereotypes to describe people that are unknown or foreign to them. He goes on to say that stereotypes and evilness are not unique or original. One quote that stuck with me was “differences in a population are often greater than differences between populations.” In this quote, Pike was trying to get across the point that there is much diversity inside of a population, and this diversity may be even greater than that population compared to another. Then, Pike goes on to discuss relations between the United States and Latin America. He claims that Anglos stripped Latin Americans of identity and by doing so “sank” to the level of Latin Americans. Pike also states that the view of Latin Americans around this time was negative- they were seen as savage and inferior compared to Anglos. Pike claims that they were seen this way because of the lack of modesty and sexual repression when compared to Anglos- whites were disgusted by Latin American nudity and saw sexual desire as something that made one weaker and more barbaric. I think that the main reason Anglos labeled Latin Americans as barbaric and uncivilized was because of the fact that they were different from them. When there are numerous differences between cultures people are unsure how to react because those differences confuse them. In The Anglo Saxons and the World’s Future, Strong claims that the Anglo Saxons should rightfully be their “brother’s keeper” when it comes to the rest of the world. Pike supports this argument by claiming that Anglo Saxons are the best representatives of the two themes responsible for making the world a better place: civil liberty and spiritual Christianity. Pike also claims that the increase in Anglo population when compared to the rest of the world shows that God is backing the Anglo Saxon race to be at the helm of the world. I think that both of these pieces are extremely and unfairly pro-Anglo and the support that each author presents is ludicrous and absurd.

To summarize the main argument of this piece is that when we write about someone else’s work, we should make sure to give ourselves the space to state our argument at some point while accessing the other person’s work. The order in which we state our things is also very important. In order to keep the reader interested, it is very important to explain what you are responding to very early in the text to keep the reader interested and not confused. I very much agree with all the arguments this reading made. Thinking back at previous papers I have written I subconsciously already do all of this because I know my paper would not make sense otherwise.

Today, I have joined several Justice Dialogues including “How Did We End Up Here? Navigating East Asian Identity & Privilege” in Lean Lecture Hall and “The Racial Divide in Infant Mortality” in Williams Hall. All of these talks were amazing and meaningful because race is a big issue here in the States. Not only did these talks reveal some of the racial/stereotypical problems, but listening to diverse perspectives also encouraged me to see things in a different lens. I believe we should all understand and respect one another regardless of race, gender, sex, and religion.

Hello everyone,

I am Tina and I am a sophomore Global and International Studies major, with a focus in political science. It is exciting to start this semester! I look forward to learning more about history related to the political relationship between Cuba and the United States. I would also like to know more about the different roles that the Latinx communities play in the U.S. I am also curious about how Latinx immigrants assimilate into American society.

This Monday, I took the day to attend as many talks as possible. I remember last year, I only attended to one and I absolutely loved it. These conversations deal with issues that I find extremely important and that affect me personally. The talk that impacted me the most was called “Decolonizing Desire.” This talk opened my eyes to what I find physically desirable in people and why I find them attractive. I am a lot more conscious and willing to try new things.

For Monday’s MK day of service, I participated sat in on a justice dialogue happening in Wishart hall, featuring members of the school board, police chief, and community members.

The focus of the discussion of o racial inequalities in and on all school grade levels. This varied from bullying in hate speech and discriminations to discussing the socio-economic disadvantages students face going to school and getting access to the necessary resources for a proper education.

Much of this also focused on how we have made groud, but there is also much further to go in what we must do, and how we must create a better world for our youth because they really are our future. We can influence this even by leading ourselves as rolemodels. The board member went on to talk about how their integration of diversity does not just create a better learning environment but also fosters the growth of role models in the classroom and learning environment. Students being able to relate to their teacher and tutors. On a life level as well as an experience level.

The “They say” piece walks through the best way to bring about a proper historical context. A point argued was to utilize the argument of the other side in your favor, but to always keep an active goal in this conscious perspective.

Strong briefly discusses two of the supposed great humanistic needs: spiritual Christianity and civil liberty. He then proceeds to explain how this is why the Anglo-Saxon is respected, because of this civil liberty “granted” to the white man. He also so much as to portray other races as having to conform to the anglo-norm in order to preserve their integrity in any amount of competition.

Part of “They Say” was proper sourcing. “The Anglo-Saxon…” was framed to only allow the point of view of Anglo-superiority where “Wild People in Wild Lands,” for the better part, breaks down into an explanation behind the racial superiority complex. Pike shows how racial stereotypes are utilized to create that distinct power distinction discussed in Strongs argument. This shines a light on the predatory tendencies of the European mindset, as there is the notion of imperialism ingrained in the idea of anything that is different, deeming it exotic. Pike discussed this is sex, many times those with the European mindset see those of other races as sexually “exotic”. We also see this in the linguistic sense titling other races as “brute beasts,” creating a historical bias