As part of the academic program, we wrote 6 reflection essays of 500 words each. We could choose any topic that related to one of our class sessions in some way. Here are mine:
Creation of Identity
During this stimulating academic program, I have plunged myself into the concepts of citizenship, patriotism, and identity, among other topics. As this is one of the first opportunities I have ever had to formally investigate these topics, I constantly yearn to understand how exactly our identities even begin to form and why we need concepts of citizenship and nationalism in our lives.
One idea that I found particularly interesting in the “Patriotism and Identity” session was Jacques Lacan’s Mirror Theory. Essentially, the theory examines what happens when we first see ourselves in a mirror, which is usually between six and eighteen months of age. It is at this point that we begin to take on our human identity and begin to recognize ourselves as “I.”
On the subject, Lacan in his “Some Reflections on the Ego” writes that “the mirror stage is a phenomenon to which [he] assign[s] a twofold value. In the first place, it has historical value as it marks a decisive turning-point in the mental development of the child. In the second place, it typifies an essential libidinal relationship with the body-image.”
It was very interesting to look back at the very beginnings of creating one’s identity. By understanding this, I feel more comfortable exploring how values of citizenship and nationalism also play into the whole development of identity.
So why do we need a sense of nationalism in order to enhance our identity? In the “Patriotism and Identity” session, I learned that nationalism is a decline of religion as a single source of knowledge, organization, and power. Thus, a need for a new, non-religious system of value, meaning, and community becomes evident. Additionally, one of the theories of nationalism deems a nation to be an imagined community because we will never know most of the fellow members of our community. It all becomes so clear! Even after we go through the “mirror stage” of developing our first identity, our human nature is to include ourselves into something bigger than ourselves. It is this sense of nationality and belonging to a larger system that makes us feel worthy.
At the same time, I have been able to reflect on the differences between nationalism and citizenship. As I look within myself, I have found that it has been so important to me to feel as though I belong to an all-inclusive nation, but also to feel that I am a citizen of that nation. With this citizenship comes my own duties and responsibilities to my government. In return I feel self-worthy and that I am playing an integral, albeit small, part in my larger community.
Through investigating how our identity forms during the “mirror stage,” to understanding the human need of inclusion, it becomes so evident to me why we need concepts of nationalism and citizenship in our lives. In fact, without them, we would undoubtedly feel less connected to our community and our world.
Bibliography:
Lacan, J., 1966. Écrits: Le stade du miroir comme formateur de la function du Je.” Paris: Seuil.
————————————————————————————————————
Guantanamo Bay
Throughout years of navigating my way through the education system, I have found that I cannot fully understand something if I lack a visual representation of that event or concept. When Ms. DeVito and Mr. Race announced that we would be viewing a film about Guantanamo Bay, I honestly could not form a visual representation of the processes and implications behind this place. On the other hand, I feel more emotionally distraught now than I did before I knew about the horrors of Guantanamo Bay. At this point, I’m trying to weigh out the differences between “ignorance is bliss” and “knowledge is power.”
Regardless of whether I would rather be blissful or powerful, I felt enraged as I learned that in November 2001, the United States created a policy that allowed indefinite withholding of any suspected terrorist without charge or trial. As the number of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay grew, the inmates themselves became known as “the worst of the worst.”
On the contrary, I believe that it is the U.S. government and any other institutions that promote Guantanamo Bay that are indeed the worst of the worst for perpetuating such inhumane happenings. It struck me how the prisoners were held neither as Prisoners of War protected by the Geneva Conventions, nor as criminal suspects with habeas corpus rights, but rather as “illegal enemy combatants” with absolutely no rights. This boggled me as I tried to understand how Guantanamo Bay could possibly be acceptable after I read about the Geneva Conventions in John Parry’s Understanding Torture: Law, Violence, and Political Identity. In this reading, I found that people who “find themselves in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals” still have a right to be free of torture and other forms of coercive treatment. Based off of this clause in the Geneva Conventions, it is absolutely nonsensical that the Guantanamo prisoners can be abused and tortured.
While watching the documentary “Outside the Law – stories from Guantanamo,” I discovered the horrific physical and mental abuse that the U.S. soldiers inflict upon these prisoners of Guantanamo Bay. As I gained more knowledge about the specifics of the torture, there was a direct correlation with increasing levels of nausea. I felt even sicker to my stomach as I learned about the acts of disrespect to the Islam religion, like throwing the Qur’an in the toilet, burning it, and so on.
The concept that is entirely too mystical for me to understand is why it is acceptable to torture the detained human beings for seemingly no purpose. Even though I do not agree with the fact that the U.S. government searched for suspected terrorists and detained them without any charges; I can at least understand the reasoning behind doing so. However, by detaining these suspected terrorists, isn’t that enough as far as security precautions? If these so-called dangerous people are locked away already, why is it necessary to abuse them as well?
This “Security and Terror” session allowed me to raise a lot of questions within myself and reflect on the actions of my own government. It also urged me to consider why the media has seemingly hid this topic from America. Obviously, it can’t be something my country is proud of, right?
Bibliography:
Outside the Law – stories from Guantanamo. 2009. [DVD] Polly Nash and Andy Worthington. England: Spectacle Production.
Parry, J., 2010. Understanding torture: Law, violence, and political identity. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
—————————————————————————————————————
Lives of Disconnect
Amidst the various topics we have covered and the debates we have held in class, I have reflected on my own internal struggles on how I live my life in disconnect with issues I am well aware of. Why do I do this? One way to explain this would be the Cognitive Dissonance Theory, which is a theory in social psychology. Basically, the theory shows how we change our attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors to justify or rationalize holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. However, that does not suggest why I choose to live in disconnect in the first place.
One of the first opportunities I had to discover my “life of disconnect” was during an exercise called “Flutes and Justice.” As Anne, Bob, and Carla argued over a flute lying on the ground, we had to decide who should rightfully get the flute. Anne is the only one who can play the flute well. Bob is the poorest child and has no other toys. Carla crafted the flute herself.
My true understanding of this adopted disconnect came when we divided into groups to debate which child should get the flute. I personally argued that Bob could use the flute as a “tool for success.” Since he had no other toys, this could be an opportunity for Bob to focus on something in his free time, instead of possibly getting into trouble in his lower socioeconomic neighborhood.
The others, though, were very adamant about their points. The group that supported Anne said that she deserves the flute since she can properly use it and live out the flute maker’s intentions. Finally, the group supporting Carla argued that she should be able to enjoy the fruits of her own labor. Although all legitimate arguments, I found it intriguing how everyone felt the need to disconnect themselves from the stories of the other children because they couldn’t bear the thought of robbing that child of the opportunity to have a flute that could be rightfully theirs.
I have found that we live in this disconnect not only in the social world with Anne, Bob, and Carla, but also as consumers in a world market. As corporations and consumers are the most common market relationship today, the consumer is forced to choose a role. Most often than not, I believe that as a consumer, my desires to purchase cheap goods absolutely conflict with my morality. Although aware of the prevalence of sweatshop labor and the high probability that the clothes I wear came from an unjust working environment, my cravings of buying the cheapest market goods takes over.
Thankfully, to ease my mind somewhat, Robert B. Reich’s “We’d Rather Not Know” showed me just how common this feeling is. In fact, he theorizes that we live in disconnect so that “we don’t have to make uncomfortable choices between the products and services we want and the ideals to which we aspire.” In turn, we are somehow able to make our market decisions while retaining our commitment to our moral obligations.
Throughout these reflections, I aim to understand why I initially choose disconnect in my life. Hopefully, by the end of this academic program, I can have a more concrete idea of why my market desires trump my moral commitments. Why not the other way around?
Bibliography:
Festinger, L., 1957. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Reich, R., 2008. We’d Rather Not Know. A Templeton Conversation: Does the Free Market Corrode Moral Character?, 2, pp.20-21.
—————————————————————————————————————
Environmental Negligence
I am living as if we had 3.06 planets to support us but we only have one. After completing the WWF Footprint Calculator, and learning this fact about the way I live, I began to think about the extent to which we close our minds to environmentalism for the convenience of our daily life. While I try to be environmentally-friendly, or “green,” I have noticed that I only act that way when it is convenient for me.
Convenience? Who am I to live “conveniently” so that my children, and my children’s children, have to live on scarcities of energy and fertile land? This “Progress and Sustainability” session reminded me of Wall-E – a Disney Pixar movie that examines the possible bleak future of our world. Essentially, set in an indeterminate future time, Wall-E dramatizes a world entirely full of garbage, with no ability to sustain life. The humans remaining are forced to live in an aircraft while machines work to clean up the garbage on Earth and attempt to find a way to bring life to the planet again. Is that what I want?
This entire session provided me an opportunity to discover other times when negligence and our human tendency to “look the other way” comes into play. Particularly interesting was our examination of when negligence turns into an environmental disaster – the April 20th, 2010 British Petroleum (BP) oil spill. The carelessness of this event caused eleven workers to lose their lives, seventeen to be injured, and oil emitting from the rig at an alarming 60,000-75,000 barrels per day (New York Times 2010).
I was able to have a particularly unique experience as I read, in England, President Obama’s address to the American nation. I was shocked when he said “each day, we send nearly $1 billion of our wealth to foreign countries for their oil.” I had absolutely no idea that my nation spends so much money for oil, which ultimately pollutes and harms our environment. I was entirely dumbfounded by this statistic.
In addition to this statistic, and taking the oil spill into consideration, we examined the interrelation between oil and globalization and how that also relates to peak oil, which is the point at which a country reaches the halfway point of the total oil available. Some research has suggested that America reached its peak oil in the 1970s. This urges that if we don’t find another way to effectively harvest energy, then it will become such a scarcity that life as we know it will completely turn upside-down. Transportation would become a luxury, as well as air conditioning, heating, and other “basic” comforts of life.
I was able to draw some conclusions and change my mindset about the importance of being “green.” I have brushed aside the idea that I will only be environmentally conscious if and only if it is convenient for me. If I, and everyone else does their part, then hopefully we will be able to maintain our planet not only for ourselves, but for the next generation as well.
Bibliography:
The New York Times, 2010. The Measure of a Disaster. [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/opinion/22macdonald.html?_r=1. [Assessed 19 July 2010].
The White House, 2010. Remarks by the President to the Nation on the BP Oil Spill. [Online] Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-nation-bp-oil-spill. [Accessed 19 July 2010].
———————————————————————————————————
The Rights of Prisoners
“Should prisoners have the right to vote?” That is the seemingly simple question Sarah Turvey posed that made my head spin during the “Inclusion and Exclusion” academic session. My gut reaction was absolutely not – all prisoners are horrendous people and should have no say in public policy. As I stepped back from my hostility and anger towards prisoners, I thought, well why not? Aren’t prisoners citizens too? My dual beliefs sent me into a horrible struggle when Ms. Turvey asked us to physically divide ourselves in the classroom. We were asked to move to a certain area depending on whether we would answer yes or no to the question.
While I chose to go to the side of the room with the “yes’s,” I felt growing resentment and even asked if I could sit in the middle of the room – on neutral territory. After Ms. Turvey kindly told me I had to choose a side, my discomfort of being in a particular area grew as I learned about various ideas and theories on the issue.
On one hand, Lord Falconer of Thoroton states that “the right to vote in the UK is considered by many to be privilege as well as an entitlement, and that persons who are convicted of an offence serious enough to warrant a term in prison have cast aside that privilege and entitlement for the duration of their sentence.” This makes perfect sense to me because it seems bizarre to give prisoners the right to vote on an elected official who is responsible for the very laws that prisoner has broken. Something doesn’t quite feel right about that.
On the other hand, the National Council for Civil Liberties declares that “prisoners remain human beings and citizens of this country, even behind bars.” Again, I absolutely believe this. Just because someone is being detained does not mean that they forfeited their citizenship at the prison gate. If someone were to come inside the prison and ask the prisoner what country they are a citizen of, they wouldn’t reply “I am nothing right now. I won’t be a citizen of the UK again until after I get out of prison.”
What was particularly eye-opening about this experience was that I have never felt such a strong duality before. I almost always can understand the views and beliefs opposite of my own, but never before have I believed so strongly in both sides of the argument. This experience has instilled in me the importance of reasoning through the entirety of a situation, finding supporting evidence and theories for each side, and finally to take a stance based on all of these factors. Sometimes it is easy to focus on enhancing my initial belief, as opposed to opening my eyes to the other side. This intense duality I felt has reminded me that seeing both sides, and opening my eyes beyond the narrow slit I sometimes see through, will always be the best choice.
Bibliography:
Lord Falconer of Thoroton. 2006. Prisoners: Voting Rights, (Column WS202), London: Parliamentary Publications.
National Council for Civil Liberties, 2007. Liberty’s Response to the Department for Constitutional Affairs’ Consultation on the Voting Rights of Convicted Prisoners Detained within the United Kingdom. [Online] Available at http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/pdfs/policy07/prisoners-voting-rights.pdf. [Accessed 19 July 2010].
———————————————————————————————————
Lack of Engagement, Rise of Ambivalence
During the last session, entitled “Knowledge and Power,” I was able to reflect upon all of the themes, topics, and issues that we have grappled with these past few weeks in Questioning Citizenship. Something that particularly stood out to me seems to be the rise of ambivalence as we, as a whole, lack a certain engagement in our citizenship. Within citizenship, I see a key factor being an educational piece. As an active and engaged citizen, I believe that educating oneself about prevalent issues, and having a well-rounded knowledge base, is vital.
In our class session, we watched a video called “A Vision of Students Today,” by Michael Wesch. Besides being very proud of the video, as it was made by my Cultural Anthropology professor at Kansas State University, I also found some befuddling points within the video. Essentially, the short film explores the way that students aren’t taking an active hold on their education – they may show up to class, but use Facebook during it.
Just as there seems to be a growing trend with students not actively engaging in their own education, these same concepts can be seen in the arena of political participation. One perk of being a citizen of a certain country means having some sort of say in governmental issues. Although somewhat of a generalization, there seem to be many people who are unhappy with the government, or a particular issue in the world, yet they do nothing to instigate change. They won’t vote, nor protest, or speak out about the issue. Some would argue that laziness is a factor… but I would push that claim aside.
So why is this happening? One study done by Clarissa White, Sara Bruce, and Jane Ritchie in May 2000 investigates the political interest and engagement among young people specifically. In their research, they found that young people become disinterested in politics because they distrust politicians and they see politics through a very limited lens.
Also, interestingly enough, young people often feel there is a lack of opportunities for them to actually engage themselves politically. This, I think, is the key factor. Going even further into this, the study concluded that young people especially tribute their powerless feelings to the fact that they can’t engage in politics until the age of 18. Although I do think it is possible for young people to get involved in other ways, like protesting or writing letters to elected officers, it doesn’t seem “official” to some extent until you can vote at age 18.
Through the many opportunities for reflection during this class period especially, I have grounded my belief that people who choose to not participate politically are not making that choice out of laziness, but rather out of lack of motivation to speak when they think their voice won’t be heard. And that, I believe, is the issue that needs to be addressed by the government.
Bibliography:
Wesch, M., 2007. A Vision of Students Today. [Online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o [Accessed 20 July 2010].
White, C., Bruce, S., and Ritchie, J., 2000. Political Interest and Engagement Among Young People. [Online] Available at: http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/political-interest-and-engagement-among-young-people [Accessed 20 July 2010].
