Reflection: My First Semester at AU

I am a firm believer that everything in an individual's life happens for a reason and that all things are interrelated. I now know, after only the first semester, that I am where I belong- in D.C., at American University, in UC World Politics.

I am truly thankful that the UC program exists and that I chose to take part in it. It helped make my transition from high school graduate to college student much easier. The program has brought me to a new group of friends that I believe will be around for the long term, and to the doorstep of professional and academic betterment. I now have a strong support network of extraordinary friends to aid me both in my academic and personal journeys, as I am there to help them with the same. The unique aspect of this class bringing a new group of friends extends far beyond my personal life. As a result of living with classmates there was reinforcement of the curriculum, whether it popped up in general conversation or actually was the conversation at the moment. This helped to not only expand upon the information learned but further solidify my knowledge as I had to defend my point and reinforce it.

Furthermore, the combination of knowledgeable PA's (Gunperi and Erin) and access to DC resources (Wednesday lab's) proved to further reinforce my knowledge and expand my horizons as to career opportunities, what is going on in my community, and extent of issues (past, present, and future). Also, the ability to get to know Professor Jackson in greater depth then an average class would allow helped to solidify the curriculum, helping to strengthen and mature both my arguments and knowledge.

I can sincerely say that if I was given the opportunity to do it all over again I would choose the program again (and again). It saddens me to think that I might not be living with these extraordinary people next year or have the same abilities to bond as a group, such as the UC common events.

Reflection: Identity

"The fact is worthy of astonishment, for man is never alone, and would not be what he is without his social dimension. And yet this is the call: for the newborn chid, his world is the world, and growth is an apprenticeship in exteriority and sociality; we might say, somewhat cavalierly, that human life is confined between these two extreme, one were the I invades the world, and one where the world ultimately absorbs the I in the form of a corpse or of ashes." (Todorov 1999, 247)

There is something to be said about the world shaping the individual and the individual shaping their world. On a developmental level, the individual gains a scope of the world through the society they are born into. The lens becomes that of which is sculpted by their societies culture. For example, American citizens have a view fostered by the values the American culture has taken as part of its identity. Contemporary America has an extreme passion for the free market and capitalism, free speech, democracy, social mobility, and various other things. Although the modern world would like to argue that people understand, this understanding of “others” comes through the eyes of the sculpted cultural lense. That is Americans will “understand” other by relating them to their culture/values; free market and capitalism, free speech, democracy, and in some sense social mobility, etc. Therefore there lacks to exist an unbiased understanding because of the fostering development of individuals, their “world” shapes them and ultimately shapes their “understanding” of other “worlds”.

There are instances where an individual shapes the society and culture they are fostered in. Still, this change is done through an underlying value (in society and within the individual) that was not necessarily recognized prior to the individual’s alteration. For example, the Civil Rights Movement occurred because of a mix of societal and individual values. On the societal side, the values of equality and progression existed they were just not utilized to such an extent until the point of the movement. On the individual side, the call for equality amongst neighbors, the call for societal betterment was always within, it just had yet to be recognized and utilized.

Although as humans our species is prone to group organization, we are inherently alone. When an individual retires to their quarters or simply their life ceases to continue it is alone; there is no companion with you. Octavio Paz once wrote; “Solitude is the profoundest fact of the human condition. Man is the only being who knows he is alone”. Thus the question remains which identity is more important or more relevant, that of the individual as a part of society or that of an individual being the sole proprietor of their life?

Reflection

One student brought up the point that the poverty in the post-industrial world (i.e. the Untied States and the Western world), was different then that of the “pre-industrial” nations. In this definition of industrialization a nation is gathering resources, utilizing them, capitalizing on goods, making scientific strides and finding new knowledge and processes with an overall focus on modernization. The goal of this modernization is to eliminate the vices within society and stride for a form of utopia. My argument would then be that our world has yet to see post-industrialization. If a country such as the United States is “post-industrial” then why do problems such as poverty run rampant? When is the last time that an individual has traveled to a major metropolitan area and neglects to see a food bank, a soup kitchen, homeless man? Its impossible. The issue of poverty isn’t solely focused in the urban but also the rural areas of this nation. If poverty exists in all forms and extremes in all areas, how has this nation utilized its resources? This country, much like the rest of the west and arguably the world, has failed to utilize its primary resources human capital.

Furthermore, through the existence of financial poverty in America and lacking any solution to the issue, our nation is becoming poor in another way, democratically. The Untied States is beginning to be poor in democratic principles. Our society upholds the idea of capitalism as synonym for patriotic America yet we are unable to alleviate the systems negative side effects. Why should one individual ultimately have more then another in a democratic society? If our country is founded on the principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (in all just pursuits) all under the banner of cooperation, how can we truly be democratic if we are on such an unleveled playing field? Our society is becoming so economically fragmented from our societies sole focus on monetary gains, that we have lost sight on human gains. Our nation should turn to acts more meaningful. Instead of saving money we should save lives, instead of making financial investments we should invest in making new relationships, instead of competing for wages and profits we should compete for the love our neighbors.

Reflection: Security/ Sanity Week

This week was paired with a heightened sense of caution amongst the citizens. There was a plot thwarted to bomb the Metro system, a flight from Yemen carrying "suspicious" cargo escorted by fighter jets to JFK, and a slight sense of anxiety from the high influx of people for the Rally to Restore Sanity. These events have led some to be more cautious in their day to day activities across the country, but D.C. in particular.

This heightened caution relates to our class discussion on security. The question I raise from these events is; what is a greater security threat, the events themselves (the thwarted plot, the flight, the large quantity of people) or the response to these potential threats? My argument would be toward the latter. For although these security risks may be great, our society's response may trigger a amplification of threat. Take for example the Rally to Restore Sanity. In hindsight, there was no meaningful damage done to the citizens or to the area. However, if individuals became frightened by the influx of people, the overcrowding of the metro, or the crowd in general, there could have been mass hysteria. This could ultimately lead people to feel uncomfortable in their homes, stray away from stores, or possibly suspect other individuals as threats to individual security. The actions taken, such as preemptive self-defesne could result in damage to other individuals and their property.

My argument is not that society should let security risks go unattended, but rather asses the threat. This assessment an analysis of potential damages, financial costs of said damages, potential courses of action to avoid threat (including inaction), and weighing of importance in regards to other threats. If individual, groups, or society misinterpret a threat or neglect to properly analyze it, the consequences could be more dire then the original threat. Therefore, threat assessment is vital in ensuring security for all.

Reflection 9

Our class spent a large amount of time discussing the security foci of the NSC 68 and the Obama document. The NSC 68's main scope was the Soviet Union and communism, in regards to their affect on the United States and democracy. The Obama document evolved security to focus on the environment, education Al-Qaeda, economic strength, global cooperation, US technological and scientific innovation, alliances, and advancement of democracy in the Middle East. The definition of US security expanded greatly under the Obama document, leading one to wonder what security is.

In my opinion, the Obama document expanded the definition of security in an effort to not leave anything out in the case that circumstances change in the world. That is to say, the United States' resources may no longer be focused on AL-Qaeda or another organization and therefore there must be another scope of focus. However, the expansion of the definition also shows that the administration realizes that US resources cannot be solely focused in one area.

I see security threats to be anything that can make a dent to the US and Western way of life. This gives a great scope of security because the western way of life is so broad; economics, the business sector, media, education, technology, medicine/health, democratic ideals, etc. Therefore it is up to the government and the citizens to realize the great source of threat in the world and seek to secure their way of life. This, in my opinion, means a focus on the expansion on education, technology, "green" products/ values, the spread of democracy, economic stability, cooperation with global actors (states and institutions), and helping citizens in nations that are unable to provide for their people. Security means carefully watching each section of life and maintaining stability within it, either through government or civic in/action.

EU Reflection

I found it interesting that that Dr. Deak, an employee of the European Union- a collective of nations, said that there is no such thing as a "European Identity". Meaning that each nation is to be recognized separately rather then together, in any circumstance. However, if one were to look back in history they would easily realize that Europe definitely does have unitary identity. This identity being one of teamwork and collective effort.

For instance, both World War I and World War II. Though Europe was technically pitted against each other, the continent did so in teams of allied forces. Allied vs Central Powers andAxis Powers vs Allied Powers respectively. The present structure of Europe itself was formed through the process of unity and consolidation, such as the Italian states which formed much later into Italy and Germanic states which eventually became Germany.

In writing on this subject I find it difficult to avoid using "it" when referring to Europe. Which I believe stems from my subconscious recognizing my social studies and the involvement of Europe as a whole in global efforts, such as the War on Terrorism and relief efforts such as AIDS. The idea of the European Union alone shows the continent's pattern of collectivity. There is no such organization in existence today. There isn't a North American Union, and Asian Union, an African Union, or a South African Union. Arguable the United Nations is like the European Union, however, the U.N.'s power could be argued to be less substantial. My point in this recognition of the "European identity" is the eventual recognition of a "Human identity", where we may all come together in a more unified effort to fight the terrors and vices of everyday life.

Reflection #3

Our discussion in class on Thursday solidified my belief that culture is topical when it comes to realism. A nation’s culture encompasses its distinct identity in terms of language, custom, art, and social institutions. If a nation chooses, the preservation of a distinct culture can equate to the survival of the state; it is just as strategically promising as the strengthening of a national military when developed correctly. I would like to briefly mention two modern examples of cultural protection. The first is France, an infamously proud nation, so proud that it actively relies upon the Academie Francaise to monitor and protect its language from foreign contaminants (usually English terminology relating to technology, such as “email”, “blog”, etc.) In this way, France militantly defends its culture to reinforce its image as a strong, independent nation-state that participates in a globalized world, but certainly is not consumed by it. From another perspective, Germany has become the main destination in Europe for refugees and those seeking asylum. In 2005, the German Federal Minister of the Interior Otto Schilly remarked, “Because of its history, Germany has a special obligation to accept political refugees. We are grateful that thousands of those persecuted during the Nazi regime on the basis of their race and political convictions were able to find refuge in other countries. Germany takes its responsibility seriously to grant asylum to victims of political persecution and to provide a new home for Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe.” (http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts/5280.html) Germany now faces a myriad of issues regarding immigration, especially tensions between the native population and Turkish families. German culture is now inherently tied to Turkish influences, and only time will reveal the effect of this transformation on the nation. From a realist point of view, Germany’s loose immigration policy and willingness to accept foreigners as a form of redemption for past mistakes represents a weakness in political strategy that could eventually lead to the destruction of former Germany.