The Educated Student: Global Citizen or Global Consumer
By: Benjamin Barber
Summary: When the United States of America’s government, centered around a democratic setting, was first envisioned in 1776 it focused on active citizenship by its constituents. Jefferson and many of the other founding fathers pushed for education of young men so that they may pilot the future of the nations government with intelligence. Education has long been associated with the ability and the power of voting. When the African Americans and Women were given the right the vote it was always precluded by the desire to intelligently study and influence one’s own government.
Over time however through the emergence of major corporations, the goal of education has been thrown off its axis. The idea that any one religious or political body may claim rights over education is met with a firm protest, however corporations and their advertisements gain easy access to the education market place. Schools seeking out ways of introducing technology that is unaffordable given present budget spending practices have begun seeking out these companies in what has become a practice of willful exploitation of the education system in America. Company will lease out the use of these technologies if only for the chance to expose young people to their own campaign gimmicks. These same companies are humbly aware of the fact that if they can get a child to use their products at an early age they will be hooked for life. Corporate America is slowly building a monopoly on the education system. Even the Internet, which was originally viewed as the frontier of information exchange, has been played as the staging ground for corporate ad wars. Children are learning more and more about their world through the eyes of these corporations; they are left unaware of alternative ideas. Even Universities look to companies to fund research, to in the end have the fruit of their labor snatched up by the companies to be horded for a profit. Education should be about educated one about public policies and to empower the individual with the knowledge to understand the workings of politics. Corporations offer a one sided view of such understandings which hurts the individual and society.
September 11 was a chance at an awakening for the people of America. It was a call for people to actively think for themselves. That morning it was the civil servant like the police and firemen that came to peoples rescue. It opened people eyes to the happenings of war, hunger, and poverty around the world. These things were once a distance idea but now it had breached the borders and was in people’s faces. This was something that prior ad campaigns never brought to light. The current trend toward globalization and its unifying factors has lead people to acknowledge a need for knowledgeable interdependent citizens of the world.
It is a call for educators and the educated alike to pursue independent facets of learning so that they may learn more than what is in the classroom. The author wants people to gain their own curiosity about current affairs. This hope runs parallel with the need for public action on the part of the public.
Response:
This article main audience was college students like myself. The call to knowledge and interdependence in this essay is very inspiring. I think it is why we read things like these essays, to help us understand other perspective of the life on this planet and anticipate and solve problems. I personally think I am a very informed individual as far as public awareness policy making goes. Once last year when I was watching the evening new my friends commented with a question of “why do you watch that? You’re like an old person.” I realized the great divide in public understanding then. The only people I know that are interested in politics and journalism majors, nobody else seems to care because they fail to see the link between things like public patenting policy and molecular genetics.
I think that we can all benefit more over if only more interest was paid to the policy making process in this country. So many people feel powerless in the fight against laws that directly affect them, mostly based on their lack of knowledge to actively influence their government, which after all is the right and obligation of a citizen. The less knowledgeable a pubic is about the happenings of its own government make it more susceptible to those who seek to exploit such a body. Educated and freethinking people are the vanguard of democracy in this country, and it is the right and obligation of every citizen to fulfill the democratic duty in that regard.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
reading journal
In Defense of Nature, Human and Non-Human
By Francis Fukuyama
Summary: The main debate about biotechnology surrounds the current issue of abortion rights. The author argues that the debate should be more focused on genetic engineering of humans. The issue of cloning is behind the veil of the abortion battle. Many believe that manipulation of the human genome before we fully understand it will result in serious and irreparable consequences. There are examples of occurrences where manipulation of nature resulted in negative consequences. No new hydroelectric dams are being made around the world because of how much worse they have made the surrounding communities. There is eagerness in the biotechnology field about the possibility of correcting human ailments and improving the longevity of life. However the human body operates like an ecosystem with delicate balances and counter balances. Editing human genetics could result in even greater problems than ones that we set out to correct. The way through this problem is though understanding and dialog. The author is not against genetic modification, but the warnings are everywhere that if we don’t take care to understand and do this carefully then problems will arise.
Response: I am biochemistry major and I loved this article. The article brings out some very prevalent and emerging issues about the ethical responsibility that comes with the ability and knowledge to edit our own genome. Never before has a species been so aware and understanding of the aspects of its own existence. There are legal patent aspects in genetic research about the ownership of certain genomes. Property in the past has never been able to be passed so easily from one organism to the next. Is if right that a person can imply ownership with of something like life? These are the kinds of questions being asked as we purge the frontier of biotechnologies. If we chose to act on modification of genes before we know what we are doing, we won’t know how to go back and modify it again should results be bad. Life is complex enough that once you edit for instance an embryo at birth, you will not be able to correct results when the person develops. With this we have to get it right the first time and this warrants restraint on our part.
By Francis Fukuyama
Summary: The main debate about biotechnology surrounds the current issue of abortion rights. The author argues that the debate should be more focused on genetic engineering of humans. The issue of cloning is behind the veil of the abortion battle. Many believe that manipulation of the human genome before we fully understand it will result in serious and irreparable consequences. There are examples of occurrences where manipulation of nature resulted in negative consequences. No new hydroelectric dams are being made around the world because of how much worse they have made the surrounding communities. There is eagerness in the biotechnology field about the possibility of correcting human ailments and improving the longevity of life. However the human body operates like an ecosystem with delicate balances and counter balances. Editing human genetics could result in even greater problems than ones that we set out to correct. The way through this problem is though understanding and dialog. The author is not against genetic modification, but the warnings are everywhere that if we don’t take care to understand and do this carefully then problems will arise.
Response: I am biochemistry major and I loved this article. The article brings out some very prevalent and emerging issues about the ethical responsibility that comes with the ability and knowledge to edit our own genome. Never before has a species been so aware and understanding of the aspects of its own existence. There are legal patent aspects in genetic research about the ownership of certain genomes. Property in the past has never been able to be passed so easily from one organism to the next. Is if right that a person can imply ownership with of something like life? These are the kinds of questions being asked as we purge the frontier of biotechnologies. If we chose to act on modification of genes before we know what we are doing, we won’t know how to go back and modify it again should results be bad. Life is complex enough that once you edit for instance an embryo at birth, you will not be able to correct results when the person develops. With this we have to get it right the first time and this warrants restraint on our part.
reading journal
Fundamentalism is Here to Stay
By Karen Armstrong
Summary:
The mid-20th century saw a secular movement, separating religion from society. Today religion dominates headlines in the forms of terror, war and political influence.
Fundamentalism is not:
1. Not equated with religious conservatism.
2. Not linked to violence
3. Not subject to Islam alone
Fundamentalism is:
1. Non-violent revolt against secular society
2. Unite religion and public life
3. Most use non-violent methods such as action through private schools and government.
4. Fundamentalists get sucked into violence with the rest of society.
Modern society evolved from what was a mid-age agrarian society to one that demands a secular and tolerant democracy. The process of modernization is currently accelerated in some cultures. Some of these cultures cant cope with the change so they choose to cling to religion. Western culture is based off of independence and innovation; bringing to life fresh and new ideas. In the beginning western culture was derived from the desire of independence from political intellectual and religious constraints; they sought a right to discover the truth for themselves.
In developing countries, modernization came with colonialization, so when the colonials left, the people were not able to forge new beginnings of their own. Japan is a perfect example of a country and a culture that was able to retain originality while undergoing modernization.
Fundamentalism represents a clash within a civilization between new and old. It stems from the feeling of being “back into a corner” and subsequent fear of total annihilation.
In the early 20th century when Muslim countries started to modernize horrific things happened to the people. Leaders in turkey ordered that people HAD to wear western clothing, and religion institutions for schooling were closed. In Iran, peaceful protesters were slaughtered out side of a mosque. Even the Sunni sect of islam was speared on by a fight with modernization.
These people feel that they are being hunted by society to begin with; military action only affirms this feeling. This is why they fight back. They first fight against their own culture’s beliefs, but when that fails they lash out at the world.
Fundamentalism is here to stay and we need to understand each other better in order to curb future acts of violence
Response: I think the author offers some very unique insight into the workings of the modern fundamentalist movement. The movement is not centered around one religion or isolated to one country. With the rise of globalization, what affects one culture will affect multiple cultures. Modernization gave countries an economic advantage in the world. When these first countries modernized, they were the first to do such a process and it yielded the unique result of a new culture, molded to suit that prior cultures views. However this is not going to work the world over because every culture, its values, traditions, and ethics, vary greatly from one the next. When one country’s leadership makes the move to modernize the country’s infrastructure, it can’t help but take notes from countries that have done it before. It is natural to assume that if you adopt enough of another countries qualities, that you will embody more of the countries qualities. I believe that many countries have a culture’s best interest at heart when they try to force the people to accept a more western way of life. The fear is that if they don’t grow and adapt they will fall apart from poverty or be invaded by a more technologically superior country. The US and country’s like it will never forgive Islamic fundamentalist for terror acts perpetrated by them. The author says that we must understand the fundamentalist state of mind so that both ideas may coexist in one society. However this asks for a huge leap of faith on the part of the people of the US and other country’s to forgive those who they feel have been attacked by the fundamentalist ideal. This is the biggest obstacle in the author’s argument for a solution (not much in the reading for a solution anyways).
By Karen Armstrong
Summary:
The mid-20th century saw a secular movement, separating religion from society. Today religion dominates headlines in the forms of terror, war and political influence.
Fundamentalism is not:
1. Not equated with religious conservatism.
2. Not linked to violence
3. Not subject to Islam alone
Fundamentalism is:
1. Non-violent revolt against secular society
2. Unite religion and public life
3. Most use non-violent methods such as action through private schools and government.
4. Fundamentalists get sucked into violence with the rest of society.
Modern society evolved from what was a mid-age agrarian society to one that demands a secular and tolerant democracy. The process of modernization is currently accelerated in some cultures. Some of these cultures cant cope with the change so they choose to cling to religion. Western culture is based off of independence and innovation; bringing to life fresh and new ideas. In the beginning western culture was derived from the desire of independence from political intellectual and religious constraints; they sought a right to discover the truth for themselves.
In developing countries, modernization came with colonialization, so when the colonials left, the people were not able to forge new beginnings of their own. Japan is a perfect example of a country and a culture that was able to retain originality while undergoing modernization.
Fundamentalism represents a clash within a civilization between new and old. It stems from the feeling of being “back into a corner” and subsequent fear of total annihilation.
In the early 20th century when Muslim countries started to modernize horrific things happened to the people. Leaders in turkey ordered that people HAD to wear western clothing, and religion institutions for schooling were closed. In Iran, peaceful protesters were slaughtered out side of a mosque. Even the Sunni sect of islam was speared on by a fight with modernization.
These people feel that they are being hunted by society to begin with; military action only affirms this feeling. This is why they fight back. They first fight against their own culture’s beliefs, but when that fails they lash out at the world.
Fundamentalism is here to stay and we need to understand each other better in order to curb future acts of violence
Response: I think the author offers some very unique insight into the workings of the modern fundamentalist movement. The movement is not centered around one religion or isolated to one country. With the rise of globalization, what affects one culture will affect multiple cultures. Modernization gave countries an economic advantage in the world. When these first countries modernized, they were the first to do such a process and it yielded the unique result of a new culture, molded to suit that prior cultures views. However this is not going to work the world over because every culture, its values, traditions, and ethics, vary greatly from one the next. When one country’s leadership makes the move to modernize the country’s infrastructure, it can’t help but take notes from countries that have done it before. It is natural to assume that if you adopt enough of another countries qualities, that you will embody more of the countries qualities. I believe that many countries have a culture’s best interest at heart when they try to force the people to accept a more western way of life. The fear is that if they don’t grow and adapt they will fall apart from poverty or be invaded by a more technologically superior country. The US and country’s like it will never forgive Islamic fundamentalist for terror acts perpetrated by them. The author says that we must understand the fundamentalist state of mind so that both ideas may coexist in one society. However this asks for a huge leap of faith on the part of the people of the US and other country’s to forgive those who they feel have been attacked by the fundamentalist ideal. This is the biggest obstacle in the author’s argument for a solution (not much in the reading for a solution anyways).
reading journal
Fear not Globalization
By: Joseph S. Nye Jr.
Summary: This article begins with a current event description of modern anti-globalism protest movements. The author argues that these people are mistaken in their belief, saying that “globalization neither homogenizing nor Americanizing the cultures of the world.” The appearance of commonalities between cultures such as cities factories and mass communication; a byproduct of similar problems faced by each. These cultures are still able to retain their originality. When China, India, and Brazil complete their current processes of industrialization and modernization, we should not expect them to be replicas of current modern cultures. In retrospect, if the US had not lead the information revolution then some other country would have and their culture would have been imposed on the world in the just the same way. Japan is a great example of a country that underwent modernization yet still retained its individual culture.
The idea that protesters have about culture is wrong is assuming that it is a static element. Culture is never static and it is always changing; it changes to coop with emerging problems from within it. Globalization works both ways how ever, no country is immune to its effects and even the US has seen some outside influence in its own cultural changes. However as the US loses military and economic influence in the world, so to will its cultural influence fade from the global scene.
Response: This article goes against the popular norm of condemning the current trend of globalization as being bad and instead tries to embrace its benefits. The author points out that humanity becomes more connected as cultural barriers are overcome. As cultures become intertwined so too will the problems they all face. It is logical to assume that as the world’s cultures become more connected, the problems will become increasingly more similar. All the problems that could arise in a society will have multiple solutions; of these only one will truly be the best solution for everyone. It doesn’t make sense for humanity to deny itself this useful tool in solving these problems. With a more connected problem solving network it increases the chances of reaching the best solution; this object benefits everyone. Change is an inevitable part of the social network, and as the author says, you’d be hard pressed to discover a culture that hasn’t changed over the years. These cultures change as a mode of evolution, they adjust to address issues and are eternally changed by it. This new culture retains elements of the new and old traditions of the people.
By: Joseph S. Nye Jr.
Summary: This article begins with a current event description of modern anti-globalism protest movements. The author argues that these people are mistaken in their belief, saying that “globalization neither homogenizing nor Americanizing the cultures of the world.” The appearance of commonalities between cultures such as cities factories and mass communication; a byproduct of similar problems faced by each. These cultures are still able to retain their originality. When China, India, and Brazil complete their current processes of industrialization and modernization, we should not expect them to be replicas of current modern cultures. In retrospect, if the US had not lead the information revolution then some other country would have and their culture would have been imposed on the world in the just the same way. Japan is a great example of a country that underwent modernization yet still retained its individual culture.
The idea that protesters have about culture is wrong is assuming that it is a static element. Culture is never static and it is always changing; it changes to coop with emerging problems from within it. Globalization works both ways how ever, no country is immune to its effects and even the US has seen some outside influence in its own cultural changes. However as the US loses military and economic influence in the world, so to will its cultural influence fade from the global scene.
Response: This article goes against the popular norm of condemning the current trend of globalization as being bad and instead tries to embrace its benefits. The author points out that humanity becomes more connected as cultural barriers are overcome. As cultures become intertwined so too will the problems they all face. It is logical to assume that as the world’s cultures become more connected, the problems will become increasingly more similar. All the problems that could arise in a society will have multiple solutions; of these only one will truly be the best solution for everyone. It doesn’t make sense for humanity to deny itself this useful tool in solving these problems. With a more connected problem solving network it increases the chances of reaching the best solution; this object benefits everyone. Change is an inevitable part of the social network, and as the author says, you’d be hard pressed to discover a culture that hasn’t changed over the years. These cultures change as a mode of evolution, they adjust to address issues and are eternally changed by it. This new culture retains elements of the new and old traditions of the people.
reading journal
Cities Without Slums
By: Namrita Talwar
Summary: This article is focused on defining the problem of “growing slums” that many of the world’s poor countries are experiencing. Slums are desolte dwellings with poor air and water quality that also experience nutrition problems associated with a lack of decent food available. It is estimated that 900 million people currently reside in slums around the world. Given these health issues, slums continue to grow as the world’s poor move from rural areas to the city in search of work. Over half the worlds population lives on less than $2 a day. The growth of these slums and the increase in poverty around the world is a product of the insecurity breed by globalization. When less advantage countries are exploited by the wealth of the world, it ensure that only the elite of that country are given a chance to survive; the rest succumb to the pressures brought on by it and fall deeper into poverty.
The United Nations Millennium Declaration pledged to improve the lives of 100 million slum dwellers by 2020, the following is an account of the plan:
The expansion of the currently congested slum areas needs to slow down. In order to do so there must be new land made available with adequate low-income housing that people in slums can afford. Also the flow of people from rural areas into this slums needs to slow in order to curb a possible inward flood that would destroy the project. The project also requires that these new areas and current areas be outfitted with clean drinking water and sanitation along with appropriate levels of road construction and electricity. Participation in these projects by the community at large is a key to the success of it. The poor are willing to invest their own labor and finance into project that directly influence their way of life. It is also pointed out that it is crucial to control property ownership in these projects. In the past when titles to property are turned over to the poor, property values climb in the area as well as the cost of living. This encourages the poor to sell their property to higher income individuals and placing them right back in the slums.
Response: This is very much a problem-solving essay. The focus of this article is all about how to execute a plan to help out those in the world living in less than ideal living conditions. I like how the plan emphasized the human factor in contributing to fixing the problem rather than just the issue of pumping money into it and hoping for results. This idea fits the classic analogy of ‘you can feed a man for a day or teach him to fish for a lifetime,’ and that is very true of these people in these slums. I think they see money as a way out but they are unsure of how to get it, or better still how to keep it. It is not that these people can’t be trusted with their own land, its more that other people who have their best interest at heart know what is truly in their best interest; this is why it is advisable to retain the titles to the property and not give them to the people. While not everyone would squander such an opportunity to get ahead in life, others will not see the bigger picture and will instead be seduced by the prospect of quick money. This idea is all about teaching the people of these slums to be self-sufficient in their endeavors, this way it is less accessible to outsiders seeking to exploit them. Not to insight prejudice with this next example but its like black people buying rims that cost more than their car or apartment, it doesn’t make sense beyond being a status symbol. It is an object that conveys to other that you have money, but it doesn’t help you to get out of poverty, it only serves to send you deeper into it. Much like the slum dwellers of the world who are similarly seduced by the lure of luxury and material items if to only pretend that they are not as poor as they are.
By: Namrita Talwar
Summary: This article is focused on defining the problem of “growing slums” that many of the world’s poor countries are experiencing. Slums are desolte dwellings with poor air and water quality that also experience nutrition problems associated with a lack of decent food available. It is estimated that 900 million people currently reside in slums around the world. Given these health issues, slums continue to grow as the world’s poor move from rural areas to the city in search of work. Over half the worlds population lives on less than $2 a day. The growth of these slums and the increase in poverty around the world is a product of the insecurity breed by globalization. When less advantage countries are exploited by the wealth of the world, it ensure that only the elite of that country are given a chance to survive; the rest succumb to the pressures brought on by it and fall deeper into poverty.
The United Nations Millennium Declaration pledged to improve the lives of 100 million slum dwellers by 2020, the following is an account of the plan:
The expansion of the currently congested slum areas needs to slow down. In order to do so there must be new land made available with adequate low-income housing that people in slums can afford. Also the flow of people from rural areas into this slums needs to slow in order to curb a possible inward flood that would destroy the project. The project also requires that these new areas and current areas be outfitted with clean drinking water and sanitation along with appropriate levels of road construction and electricity. Participation in these projects by the community at large is a key to the success of it. The poor are willing to invest their own labor and finance into project that directly influence their way of life. It is also pointed out that it is crucial to control property ownership in these projects. In the past when titles to property are turned over to the poor, property values climb in the area as well as the cost of living. This encourages the poor to sell their property to higher income individuals and placing them right back in the slums.
Response: This is very much a problem-solving essay. The focus of this article is all about how to execute a plan to help out those in the world living in less than ideal living conditions. I like how the plan emphasized the human factor in contributing to fixing the problem rather than just the issue of pumping money into it and hoping for results. This idea fits the classic analogy of ‘you can feed a man for a day or teach him to fish for a lifetime,’ and that is very true of these people in these slums. I think they see money as a way out but they are unsure of how to get it, or better still how to keep it. It is not that these people can’t be trusted with their own land, its more that other people who have their best interest at heart know what is truly in their best interest; this is why it is advisable to retain the titles to the property and not give them to the people. While not everyone would squander such an opportunity to get ahead in life, others will not see the bigger picture and will instead be seduced by the prospect of quick money. This idea is all about teaching the people of these slums to be self-sufficient in their endeavors, this way it is less accessible to outsiders seeking to exploit them. Not to insight prejudice with this next example but its like black people buying rims that cost more than their car or apartment, it doesn’t make sense beyond being a status symbol. It is an object that conveys to other that you have money, but it doesn’t help you to get out of poverty, it only serves to send you deeper into it. Much like the slum dwellers of the world who are similarly seduced by the lure of luxury and material items if to only pretend that they are not as poor as they are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)