Reflection Week #15

And just like that we're at our last reflective blog post! What a wild ride it has been. Honestly the semester flew by—it really seems like I moved in last week! 

My plan for this week was to reflect on the second simulation—even though it seems like it was weeks ago it was just this past Monday! For the simulation, Noël, Molly, and I represented South Pacific Business Development. The group focused on micro-finance and our team came up with a plan that balanced the climate initiatives of the resolution with our own economic interests. We were quite pleased with our plan as we assumed it would be well-received and not have a lot of controversy, but we were in for a big surprise. For a significant amount of the debate period on Monday the discussion centered around dredging and the sustainability of it, not leaving any space for our group to really contribute to the conversation. 

Once we were finally able to propose our amendment, it was almost immediately shot down, leaving us feeling rather defeated. We had even come up with counterarguments to address the concerns and cons brought up during debate, but we were never able to use them. Here's what we had typed up on the document to gather our thoughts on the debate on our amendment:

We’re not representing them, we have pre-existing micro-finance operations in them and they wouldn’t be using their resources but rather adding workers from ¼ of the Kiribati population. Additionally, the integration process is not set on moving I-Kiribati’s only to the previously mentioned countries, however, this plan would be more beneficial for the people to begin an integration process before the island is completely under water.

• Also we are financed by China and Japan so…
• We have partnership with countries
• They’re going to be consulted and there will be talks with the UN
• Also it’s not all people going to those places, it’s only a quarter of population at first
• Literally integration problems are happening with Syrian refugees right now - they can’t work and are forced into poverty

Even though we didn't get to share all of these thoughts and ideas with the rest of the class, I am glad that I got the be part of this group. I think it's important to realize that within any one issue there are so many different interests and finding a compromise that all the interests agree on is very hard. It may have been frustrating, but the simulation still made me very excited to actually work in this field one day. I find it so interesting and find a lot of value in making compromises because how else is anything going to get done in our country, let alone our world?

World Politics has truly been a wild ride and I will definitely miss this class but I'm excited to build upon what I've learned here over the rest of my college and life experience! Thanks PTJ (:

As Soon As I Get Home: Tangible and Intangible Home- Week 15

I am a few days from being home. A few days from being on my turf, and a few days from being in my Arena. I sit here thinking, and I realize that the privilege of choosing to go home is a privilege that not many people have the choice of just choosing to do. Some people come from places where war is the deterring factor and a barrier to their ability to reunite with their beloved homeland. For centuries when humans have been uprooted from home or have migrated by choice,  people carry home with them through beliefs, customs, language, and tradition. However, what happens when the ability to carry home is taken from you or restricted? What happens when this freedom is challenged. 

In "Who Stole The Dream" the Joilani struggled with their concept of home, and during the most difficult times in their lives they desired to simply return to life as they knew it. In the process, though home rested in their hearts like a bittersweet memory, and they believed that "a Joilani homeland still lived". From the surface this statement could be interpreted as literal, but when observing it under the lens of an intangible concept of home, which is the who which can't be taken. It is the intangible home that is the home to all memories and traditions. It is the adaptable concept of home that is flexible and creates confidential ways to experience home. One of the hardest realities when having to cope with the lost of tangible home with the  concept of intangible home is that during the acceptance of the coping mechanism, one may be subjected to negative experiences that contradict one's values.  Despite this reality, one must remember that home is not only tangible, but it is where the heart is. There are aspects of home that no one can take from you, and though the Joilani experienced a rough plight, if they look deeper inside themselves, they will realize that the true essence of home is with them in every moment because it's within.  This doesn't make up for the unfortunate state of their reality, but it introduces a different perspective. 

It's Been Real, World Politics

To stay true with the lingo I’ve been using in conversation, it is a bit silly that the semester is coming to a close. 

I have changed. Back home, my best friend and I would always talk about how college would be a wondrous time to redefine the versions of ourselves to be what we want to be without any past reputations or home town expectations holding us back. It has been quite an experience to see how we are revamping our old selves so quickly.

From the second I stepped onto campus I have tried to be more present- to be the better Noël and define the version that AU would know me as to how I want to be perceived and the qualities I want to have. This is not to say I’m a completely different person, only that I can’t say I am a fan of being forever identified with New Jersey and all that. Washington D.C. represents so much for me. It is a new home and a place that is filled with opportunity constantly pushing myself to be better. 

However, through this, I have let go of many parts that used to represent a larger part of myself. When seeing a couple of friends over Thanksgiving break, I found out how much I had changed… I missed discussing politics and absurd IR theories at 2 am in the sky lounge. I am one of the lucky ones in that my college experience has made it feel more like home in 4 months than New Jersey. 

Academically, I was terrified of AU and international relations and honestly, I still kind of am. One of my first reflections was about being a small fish in a big pond. Since I had close to no experience in what IR entailed, I was hit by a big dose of “imposter syndrome.” Coming here, especially a part of the gloscho community was intimidating beyond measure. Although I still have times of doubt and fear, I can understand the growth that being pushed in my beliefs and skills has resulted in. 

I can see how the idea of being a small fish in a big pond is kind of absurd… One thing (among many) I learned from this semester was how relative everything is and the ideas of comparing yourself to others. Everyone’s pond is different and there are factors that we cannot control (climate change, drought… etc.) but as long as we all stay aware that there are ponds different from our own, all we can do is just keep swimming !

World Politics has been like no other course. Between the energy and diverse structure PTJ provided the class and the insane discussions we had, I continue to be exhilarated by how large the expanse of IR is and how many paths there are to explore. I only wish that PTJ could switch to lecturing our International Research class next semester instead of next year. That being said, I already cannot wait to return to AU after winter break and reunite with everyone as we take on another semester!

What is the purpose of life? -- Week 15

I just laughed to myself when typing the title of my reflection post this week. It looks like an ironic semester-ending joke satirizing the idea of these reflection posts, and although it probably should be, its not: I really want to discuss the meaning of life in this post.

After our last reading, I had the opportunity to reflect on the idea of human nature and the implications of our semester on the idea of "eat or be eaten". After talking with Xandra this week, we came to an agreement that although perfection is impossible to reach, and that believing in the goodness of society or its potential to break the power-atrocity complex is naive, there is a solution in how to go about our lives. If we knowingly allow ourselves to be idealistic in a way, and work tirelessly to improve something in the world, its possible for us to make a positive shift, no matter how small. Each choice we make in our lives, each failure, each success -- they all seem to matter so much to us... but reality is that our lives are so insignificant in the grand scheme of the universe. While this could be a discouraging and self-defeating statement, it is also freeing in a way. The power that one gets when they zoom out and put all of that which is known to them in perspective is a dangerous one to wield and has led many educated people to suicide.

Despite this, I believe that this power of perspective can also be incredibly beneficial. It reminds me of a story I once heard from my Rabbi during Rosh Hashannah (Jewish New Year) services. I found a version online (https://www.cityyear.org/about-us/culture-values/founding-stories/starfish-story) and included it here:
"A young girl was walking along a beach upon which thousands of starfish had been washed up during a terrible storm. When she came to each starfish, she would pick it up, and throw it back into the ocean. People watched her with amusement. 

She had been doing this for some time when a man approached her and said, “Little girl, why are you doing this? Look at this beach! You can’t save all these starfish. You can’t begin to make a difference!” The girl seemed crushed, suddenly deflated. But after a few moments, she bent down, picked up another starfish, and hurled it as far as she could into the ocean. Then she looked up at the man and replied, “Well, I made a difference to that one!” 

The old man looked at the girl inquisitively and thought about what she had done and said. Inspired, he joined the little girl in throwing starfish back into the sea. Soon others joined, and all the starfish were saved."

While the ending of this story is a little corny or idealistic, the message really hit home for me and I think it captures a lot about why each one of us was put on this planet.

To extend this to my current situation, a college student with aspirations for the future, working day by day to make something of my life, is important. I have to remember that while my current grades, relationships, habits, health, etc will affect my future dramatically, I shouldn't be afraid to take risks and think about things in the context of what will A) make the world a better place and B) make myself and others happier in our own lives, rather than each and every small thing in life. 

So, I know that this post wasn't a revolutionary world-changing answer to the eternal question, "What is the purpose of life?", but I think that it explains a little bit that could give any one of us control over our own purposes and a sense of calculated, cautious optimism about the future. 

Stop Being Pessimistic: The Power - Atrocity Cycle is NOT Inevitable

I hear you. The power-atrocity cycle is inevitable. People are inherently selfish. Things supposedly  can get better, but it is all a facade. Great. Wonderful. Perfection is impossible. Let's all go contemplate the helplessness, hopelessness of life. We have been doing it all semester. 
In a way I agree. Perfection is impossible. As Jacob convinced me, there are always trade-offs in a seemingly good thing. And maybe, in the long term, improvement in the human condition will always prove itself a fickle thing. I could go around in circles with you on this topic all day. In fact, I would love to. Nevertheless, I think there are valid points to be made supporting the proposition that certain cycles are not inevitable, at least in the 'short term'. We discussed the prime example in class today: the repetition of history concerning cycles of power and atrocity.
James Tiptree/ Alice Bradley Sheldon's short story We Who Stole the Dream exemplifies the idea that this pattern is inevitable, yet it contains all the necessary elements which I believe, if properly capitalized on, could prevent the pattern from repeating itself. 
*disclaimer: This is not a lit review/fully flushed lit analysis or SIS final paper, so my arguments are shortened to their basics, but if you want to chat to discuss it more in depth, hit me up* 
1) Find allies within the system
       - Tiptree describes one Terran on page 368 who appears sympathetic to the Joilani situation. This shows that not all Terrans are hopeless brutes. If Joilani continued to find people like that Terran and created a group of allies from within the Terran system, sustainable change could have been made to topple the Terran's system of Joilani mistreatment from within the system itself. 
       - Proof that this works in real life: The abolitionist movement in the United States. Movements for women's equality within organized religion. 
2) Justice and retribution
       - Tiptree acknowledges issues of lingering hate and hurt between oppressors and the oppressed when she describes how some Joilani needlessly killed cornered Terrans on page 377. If the need for justice and retribution is realized and addressed by both parties in a fair and equivocal manner, this can prevent cycles of problems occurring due to lingering resentment.
       -Proof this works in real life: https://youtu.be/G422U9faPSg 
3) Empower the subjugated
       - In We Who Stole the Dream, this is symbolized with nourishing the young Joilani with the Terran food and witnessing the positive effects it has on the physical size of the children. Those with a history of subjugation need to be given the resources to reach an 'equal' playing field. This could take the form of representation in the government, accessible education, affordable housing, or even an assured avenue for employment.
      - Applied in real life: Obviously many cultures have struggled with this part as particularly evident in the United States. Nevertheless, that does not mean the U.S. has failed to make any strides to meet this need, hence affirmative action and EEOC policy. The situation for most previously subjugated people is far from perfect, but each stride towards empowering those people is a step in the right direction. 
4) Reminder of the mistakes of the past
        -There was the potential for the elder Joilani and the Terran ship the Dream to have played this part in the Joilani empire. Unfortunately, in the story, the 'new' Joilani focus on using the ship not as a symbol of what will occur if the Joilani do not watch their actions, but as a source of information to build their empire, and they shun the symbol of the inevitable effects of their actions (the 'old' Joilani) in an isolated area separated from the rest of society.
       -Example of the use of symbols and remembrances of past atrocities: https://www.ushmm.org/
5) Religion/Values
       - The Joilani value of sharing, depicted on 372, could have easily been used as a tool for preventing a society committing atrocities that they so abhorred in the past. Unfortunately, as h0lt mentioned in class, religion/moral values of a society are often misused to perpetuate violence that in their essence, they actually condemn. This dichotomy is represented in the discord between Bislat and Jivadh at the end of the story. Nevertheless, if cultural values or religion is employed in the process of enacting change or fighting cultural violence, the change will be much more sustainable.
        Proof in real life: Making Peace with Faith: The Challenges of Religion and Peacebuilding edited by Michelle Garred & Mohammed Abu-Nimer 

I remember a comment from one of peers that was along the lines of "talking theory is great, but in the end discussing it is not going to make a change." I feel as important as learning theory is, I have noticed in our class that elongated discussion of it tends to foster feelings of hopelessness and pessimistic views of the suck-i-ness of society. Valid as that is, and important as it is to acknowledge, I hope that in conversations in the future, we will allow ourselves to imagine a ridiculously ideal society and begin to ask ourselves what would need to be done in order to get there. For this Holiday season, give yourself the gift of (very possibly) idealistic, positive thinking; put the hopelessness in a box and compartmentalize it.

Culture Hierarchy vs. Diversity -- Holiday Edition

The blog question this week presents a very interesting—yet potentially controversial—set of ideas. I think the claim presented in the blog question regarding Todorov's focus on the other rather than on the effects of different cultural practices is profound and is an important distinction to make. So, to offer my own opinion, yes there are some cultural practices that are simply superior to others. This can be easily supported in certain cases such as in arguing that cultures practicing cannibalistic diets, and human sacrifices in modern times can be described as inferior. Beyond that, things start to get a little messy, yet not completely unmanageable.

First off, while it may be possible to collect enough empirical evidence about the effects of certain cultural practices and therefore compare them to each other, any conclusion that could be made would likely call for an extensive amount of knowledge of the totality of the context in which the practice is prevalent. What I mean by this is that it is very impractical to expect to empirically collect data of one cultural practice being "better" or "superior" to another. However, it may be possible to collect empirical evidence to suggest that a certain practice has a positive correlation with human longevity while a different practice has a less strong correlation with it, or something similar to that analysis. 

The second thing to consider is whether or not its a good idea to even begin to categorically suggest that cultural practices of others are inferior to one's own. As we all should know, this type of us vs. them or superiority complex has led to the oppression of many groups of people in history and often no good comes of this type of unprovoked, categorical negative assessment of others. This inspires the question: Can an individual practice a certain culture, personally dismissing alternatives, without subordinating those who practice said alternatives?

I believe the answer is yes, these two things can be mutually exclusive. I understand the argument that by conducting oneself in accordance with a certain practice, they inherently dismiss other practices and therefore believe these other practices to be inferior. However, I don't think that this is always true. I believe an individual could conduct themselves in a certain way simply because they are most used to doing things that way and have a deep personal connection to the cultural practices they participate in. Just because I don't celebrate the holiday of Christmas, for example, doesn't mean I have to believe that Christmas is an inferior holiday to Chanukkah. In fact, Christmas is a much more significant holiday to Christians than Chanukah is to Jews—if measuring the holiday by its importance within the respective religious group, Chanukah is clearly the less important one. Nevertheless, Chanukah is the holiday I gladly, joyfully, and meaningfully practice. This isn't to say that I think Christmas is a superior cultural practice, rather the comparison of the two is more like a comparison of apples to oranges and therefore I can practice the holiday while also happily wishing a Merry Christmas to Christians without a conflict of interest. If, for example, I wanted to make the claim that latkes are better tasting than Christmas fruit cake, I could probably garner a lot of support, but this conclusion is yet again a matter of opinion. 

Really, what everything boils down to is how strong the opinion of the majority is regarding a specific cultural practice. Let's say there was a winter holiday practiced by some minor religious sect in which at dawn on the day of the annual holiday the members of said sect gathered together, drank a glass of cow milk each, killed and ate five randomly selected community members between the ages of 12-14, and then sang a hymn, we could likely agree as a majority that this holiday is explicitly inferior to both Chanukah and Christmas. 

The problematic thing about using the standard baseline of the "opinion of the majority" is that this often changes. At one point in history in the United States, the majority opinion may have been that Chanukah is an inferior holiday because the Jewish people are inferior people. Just like, at one point in history the practice of homosexuality was seen by the majority as inferior to the practice of heterosexuality. In fact, and this one might really mess with everyone's heads, both of these opinions may still  be the majority opinion in some places in our country, if not nationally. That's why this question is so hard to answer and why giving an empirical value to the effects of a practice aren't objective. Heck, if the majority of US citizens believe cannibalism was an okay thing to do at some point in the future for some reason, then the idea that it is inhumane or has effects that are detrimental in some way to society could also change.

Objectivity vs. Subjectivity and other philosophical dichotomies or spectrums such as these I am dealing with in relation to this weeks blog question are undoubtedly intriguing to think about and discuss, yet I think the most important thing to take away from this whole exercise is this: treat other cultures and other people with respect, tolerance, and a willingness to learn from them whenever possible. Instead of trying to make a categorical claim about a practice being inferior or superior, make a personal decision about what to do and don't let your own opinion about which practice is right for you allow you to harbor hateful prejudice that affects your interaction with others. 

Who Knows ?

“Difference with equality” is a concept that I do not think fully exists in the way that it is isolated within this context. This is because the idea of equality includes having the same status, rights, and opportunities whereas the complete definition of the difference is that of having variations of these same aspects. However, the root of the post is to look at whether the knowledge of effects delegitimizes the moral force of different questions. While there is a difference between the statements of opinion and those more empirically based. However, reverting to the “inspiration” behind this question and the two examples of flat-earthers and anti-vaxxers, I agree with the points made in that post, stating the difference is on whether individuals are harmed as a result of ignorance. 

Within Todorov’s three axes, epistemic, axiological, and praxeological, I feel that them being seen as equivalent is not the way realistic to how they realistically progress. Looking at them about knowledge, the lowest and simplest form of interaction between “others” would be the lack of knowledge and therefore epistemic. The next level would be labeling this ignorance and unawareness through axiological forms. The hierarchy ends with a more direct exchange between the two groups, in search of knowledge or with an awareness of individual bias, ignorance, or naivety through the praxeological axis. 

In general, I believe that the world is seeing a trend of praxeological mindsets where knowledge of effects is promoted, while it is still accepted for a party to not be as factual if they are aware of their perspective being dictated solely by values. With this, we should be looking to continue furthering research for the areas of ignorance that inflict harm on others. However, there will always be different perspectives that see issues as being both empirical or inaccurate based on factors of upbringing and beliefs. Moreover, the debates of religion and opinions of many social issues cannot be completely refuted, and should not be delegitimized because there is personal evidence that factualizes these beliefs. Conversely, beliefs that cause harm or damage to individuals or have more negative effects than not, should be better supported with morals as well as factual events. 

I still think there are many layers to this question that can be further answered with more exploration on both the axes as well as how they can be applied to the concept of “difference with equality” and other varied questions alike.