#as with anything concerning social norms and the need to adhere to them in order to (try) be accepted | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

dramionediscussion · 3 years

Text

This Crookshanks vs. Scabbers thing reminds me, that so often in HP related discussions, I find hard to make any definitive stance or firm judgements. Frequently, there just isn’t sufficient information about circumstances, or a perspective given is too limited or one-sided. Sometimes it’s also, that there truly isn’t a moral dimension to an issue as I can see it. Sometimes even moral, prosocial or at least normative behavior by every participant can sometimes lead to a tragedy, conflict or net loss to all involved, without anybody being truly “responsible” (it implying fault in this context. Not merely what or who originates some causal chain of events). Like looking at this Crookshank and Scabbers debate. I think, there’s two related but separated issues here. First is the incident and events leading up to it, or making it possible in the first place. Then Hermione’s and Ron’s reactions to the event.

I mean, how is this even supposed to work? Hogwart’s rules for familiars and pets in general seems quite dysfunctional and chaotic. Cohabitation in limited spaces, combined with the policy, which allows students bring all manners of animals, some of which are incompatible with each other in closed quarters. We see owls, cats, toads, rats, spiders and pygmy puffs in HP series, and apparently also ferrets and crows in CC. Any rules, guidelines and organizing seems to be reserved only to owls, which are separated from living quarters, which is lucky I suppose, considering that owls include all other types in their diet (though they still carry messages between inhabits inside the castle). To the rest, it’s survival of the fittest. To me it seems pure chance and happenstance of how events will turn out in those circumstances. A lot of everything is simple up to what kind of animals people happen to have and in what proximity to each other, e.g. imagine if Neville would’ve had a ferret or cat instead of a toad.

It’s not reasonable or fair to expect some kind of a spontaneous order or ideal solution to pop up in those conditions. Or even some reasonable compromise. I don’t see that either Hermione or Ron failed to perform some fair and comprehensible obligations and responsibilities all pet owners should adhere to. With so many moving parts and people in such a limited space, and very asymmetrical needs and risk for different pets. Expecting (young) people to coordinate that together, especially without any official rules, in otherwise strictly rule bound environment is catastrophe waiting to happen. It’s not like they have any hierarchy or power over each other either, and in a situation which is not governed by existing rules. Plus, there didn’t seem to be anybody with an actual authority (or interest) to mediate and mitigate disagreements between (nominally) equal parties, and ultimately settle the dispute between them.

Only way to maximize safety would’ve been caging animals (some of them, or all of them). But it is no way beneficial or neutral thing to do for any of them, so somebody’s pet is going to suffer only to accommodate somebody else’s benefit. It’s not a natural habitat of any animal, even if rats and toads adapt to that better than cats or ferrets, but there’s distress and limiting their natural potential and animal essence. In Ron’s case, that probably wouldn’t have worked in any case. I doubt it would’ve been possible to cage Scabbers / Wormtail, when Sirius Black was on his trail, or possibly even in if he wasn’t (there’s so many ways that could’ve played out. Maybe he would’ve avoided it fiercely by biting, running away and hiding. Or stop eating or starting to play dead in the cage, or break out from it. Whatever would’ve happen, I doubt it would’ve been possible to keep him in a cage without causing quite considerable and visible harm to him). I mean, even if it was a regular old rat, it would’ve been cruel, as it had been allowed to free-range for most of its life.

Containing Crookshanks to 3rd year girl’s dormitories would’ve probably caused similar problems. Low stimulus and lack of variation, would’ve probably cause boredom and depression to such an intelligent animal. Also, in practical terms, I doubt it would’ve worked out, because many others lived in same quarters. Thus he probably would’ve constantly got out, because people kept coming and going, and maybe left door open for a second too long, or forgot to keep the door shut all the times, etc. Once it’s out, it’s a major operation by many people to locate it in a huge castle like Hogwarts. Unless there’s a serious concern for his safety, you’d probably just had to wait until he returned on its own.

Neither of them are particularly neglectful or malicious. There isn’t clear-cut ideal course of actions for either. I suppose, they could’ve at least tried to work something out, even if there wasn’t any win-win solutions available. But there wasn’t a good way to determinate, which one of them should’ve budged or taken the hit. I don’t know, if even volunteering to take the hit would’ve been that altruistic, because it would been mainly their pets who would’ve suffered for it, and they themselves only indirectly. I don’t see there’s a moral transgression here. Perhaps they’ve should’ve been a bit more conciliatory towards each other, but I doubt that even that would’ve changed the ultimate outcome much. Both had legitimate and morally sound arguments, concerns and interests, which just happened to conflict in those circumstances. Happens all the time.

The fact that Crookshank didn’t eat Scabbers in the end, is almost incidental, because it could’ve easily happen, and distress and fear wasn’t uncalled, and the whole scenario was totally plausible. Given circumstances, probabilistically thinking it was the most likely outcome (compared that one’s pet rat is actually a murderer on the run), and one of the few even possible outcomes out there.

Their reactions are a bit similar. Ron is an instigator and aggressor initially, by blowing up on Hermione and accusing her viciously immediately. Though, it was his rat who’d disappeared without trace (eliminating the possibility that it would’ve been accidentally crushed by someone in their dorms), and Crookshanks being responsible is not the only the most likely, but one of the few possibilities there even were. Still, holding Hermione at fault is unfair, though that instinctual emotional outburst is hardly a major ethical crime. It’s not the high road or virtuous, or even honorable, but that’s pretty much it. Holding that against Hermione and the disloyalty and betrayal he shows at her during later that year is totally another matter (though it’s only tangentially related to Scabbers).

I can see why Hermione would be at the first defensive, as it’s equally natural reaction, when confronted by someone whose consumed by anger, and probably temporarily beyond rational discourse. I don’t think she should have even apologized at all, because I don’t see that she truly was at fault or did anything wrong. After all, an apology is also always an admission of guilt as well. There’s quite a lot of studies about this, but often they make things worse, and make people even more angry or vicious towards you, partly because of that. Not only you admit wrongdoing, but also out you as a moral defective, by doing something heinous in the first place.

Quite likely Ron would’ve been even more enraged, if she would’ve reflexively apologized. A person genuinely needs to be willing to accept an apology, and then move on. They definitely shouldn’t be dished out needlessly, casually or thoughtlessly (not including a common courtesy, like if bumping into someone. Those don’t carry moral weight, thus are phenomenologically different).

She should’ve been genuine sympathetic and being sorry for Ron’s loss and distress, if not during the initial fight, but at least at some point, even if she didn’t exactly cause it. However, she was never was, and she seemed to be more interested in being right and winning an argument (she sometimes has that cold and frankly thoughtless side, in which she seems to be far more interested in being “right” by some factual standards, disregarding empathy or social relations and circumstances she’s in).

----

Edit:

I agree with everything you said. It's very understandable for Ron to immediately get angry and to accuse Crookshanks of "killing" his pet. Its literally a cat and mouse chase! And its understandable for Hermione to be on the defensive. This incident happened in third year, so they are both 13-14 ish, children really. You really cannot expect children to act rationally and not emotionally. We as adults can see that they are both in the wrong. And I think as kids when we saw this play out or we read it, we had chosen our sides. I know for me personally I was on Hermione's side. I was all for Hermione defending herself and was just as smug as her when the truth was revealed! But now, I can see that they both are wrong and right at the same time.

You last take on Hermione though, she has always had this air of superiority, and you are right, sometimes she needs to be "right" and she doesn't care about anything else, even her friends feelings.

- Lisa

3 notes · View notes

tomasorban · 5 years

Text

THE ZODIAC: ARIES THE RAM

Polarity: Positive, male, Quality: Cardinal, Ruling planet: Mars, Element: Fire, Body part: Head and face, Colour: Red, Gemstone: Diamond, Metal: Iron.

Aries is considered the inaugurator of the zodiac, primarily because it is associated with the vernal equinox, a time when the formative forces of Mother Nature are beginning to regenerate and Life finds its prodigious voice from in between the silent chasms of the slumbering earth. Hence we could equate this zodiacal sign to seed and flame, quite literally for the most part. On a broad, suprapersonal and cosmic level Aries represents everything that has to make do with new beginnings; it is inextricably connected to an agglomeration of potentiality from whence the seed of all life has sprouted, to raw and unharnessed willpower, to action potential, to fearless and thoughtless impulse, to the progressive and spontaneous nature of originality and creativity.

To understand the mode of being that descends from the stars of Aries one must have an intimate acquaintance with the properties of elemental fire. “I’m hot, unconscious, uncompromising, and explosive,” says Aries. “I was here first everyone! There is no other that has preceded me. When you were all going to the mill I had already bagged and sold megatons of wheat, and devised a new method for growing it too. Scorpio, you might have finally figured out how to crawl out onto land from the bottom of the sea without kicking the bucket but it was I that offered up the pivotal clue that enabled you to do so. Taurus, you might be very pretty, well-endowed, and athletic but the girls still prefer me cause I’m the original. Cancer, you might know how to walk sideways and crawl right out of sticky situations but I can steal the head atop from right under one’s nose without their ever noticing. Gemini, you’re the pits. You can’t decide from which angle you want to view life, you’re a two-faced twat and your co-dependent behaviour is pukeworthy! Virgo, you might still be a goody-two-shoes virgin but you don’t really think like one. What you all ought to know is that I spoke, moved, touched, saw, and conquered first… you can all improvise, but your way will never be as good as mine because I thought of everything first!”

Well I guess now we all know who we’re dealing with, hey? To understand the innermost fears, desires, wishes and aspirations of the Arian psyche we must at once return to a more personalized beginning, the psycho-spiritual situation of childhood. Do you remember your first steps into the world, that narcissistic, self-centred yellow flower that was blind to all other shades of yellow in the prairie? Do you remember the impudent child that was so set in its ways and getting what it wanted that it wouldn’t as much as given an inch for the wellbeing of another? Do you remember your short-attention spans, your impatience, and the inability of significant others to subject your immature, single-minded will to the wisdom of analytical evaluation and contemplation? Do you? Do you remember the days of “Me, myself, and I?” Of course you do, why shouldn’t you? Alas, living is just so much more gratifying and titillating when everyone tiptoes around the glorified vision of the world that is yours without the right to hail an insurrection against your theoretical premises. After all, you are the king of your jumping castle, and everyone else’s too.

The mythographer Ovid, was either channelling the great Arian power or writing about a real Arian man when he transcribed his version of the classical flower-myth recounting the fate of the youthful Narcissus. For anyone not familiar with the said myth, Narcissus was a gorgeous boy whose arrogant indifference towards all who expressed sexual interest in him was enigmatic. He was pursued ceaselessly by women, men, nymphs and other mythological creatures, but he would have none of them. One day he saw the simulacrum of his own self in the reflection of a pond and fell head over heels in love with it. Narcissus was at once filled with burning desire to unite with his own likeness. He lowered himself over the reflection, wishing to kiss and caress it and fell in. Given that the boy couldn’t swim, he drowned. In retrospect, one might say that the youthful Narcissus was a bit of a loner, a boy whose self-centeredness, noncommittal tendencies and intense awareness of his own strengths and weaknesses kept him detached from reality and shipyards from any lasting or worthwhile relationships. Further, his insulated approach to life probably stemmed from the unwillingness to open himself up to another for fear of being hurt and fear of facilitating the impression that he had relinquished power of his own being. In the myth we see that Narcissus conducts his affairs in accordance to his own terms; the fear of obligating himself or falling in love and giving another power over him paves a path that inevitably leads to self-destruction. This is Ares to a tee, which can more often than not raise its psychic defences so high as to be eerily unaware of the sonic boom made by the presence of all other archetypes.

Arians have a special talent for seeing in infrared, a phenomenon which can be attributed to the rulership of Mars. The formidable fiery and restless masculine energy exemplified by the red planet rules this sign; it is in constant motion, sometimes simmering subtlety and at other times violently, bubbling in the depths of the collective unconscious for some time before being ejected into those fortunate enough to be born under its stars. Just like electrochemical signals are transposed into thoughts, emotions and memories, so too is this formidable force transmuted into an unconscious and unwavering drive, vitality, willpower, desire, and determination that allows one to succeed at anything they choose to do. The immense physical drive associated with this unconscious urge, the will to break and tear things, drives Arians to war, just as it did when the qualities associated with Mars were allowed to express themselves in full during the precessional age of Aries. Naturally, the process of industrialization, and the cultural and so-called spiritual evolution that has unravelled since do well to contain the violent and bloodthirsty acts that such a primordial power harnesses, and so Arians are forced into engaging socially acceptable and conventional pastimes and activities in which it can be expressed constructively. This is good because their simple-mindedness sometimes prevents them from perceiving the difference between courage and stupidity. In any case, if contained, these tidal forces become a ticking-time bomb. Hence, Arians are more likely than not to engage some form of physical activity like jogging, weight-training, bodybuilding, long distance running, cycling, water sports, and so forth. Given their preoccupation with inner experience, their fierce independence and their self-sufficiency, it is not uncommon to see them wearing headphones or some device aimed at severing the distracting and unwanted stimuli of the outside world.

Naturally, not everything about this sign is tainted in a negative glow. Aries encompasses the fiery seed of creation and like the feminine spirit of Mother Nature herself possesses the virtue of originality and novelty. The former is a powerful, evolutionary tool of experimentation and Arians follow in her stead; an Arian man or women is likely to take risks or chances with things and will fiercely resist compartmentalization and the adherent to social norms and conventions. Aries is not likely to be the housewife that bows to the undisputed authority of her husband, or the savvy businessman who knows which ego to stroke in order to scramble along the rungs of conventional success. Aries is Herculean and more eccentric in the way it goes about its business, so it is more likely to be the Greenie that fights for the rights of our marine friends, the whales and dolphins, or the mindless, brazen thrill-seeker wishing to walk a tightrope between two precipices without a harness. The best thing about the Arian mentality is that it is as direct and blunt as a blinding torchlight in the dark, and comes completely unencumbered by psychological jargon; everything in the Arian world is black and white, simple and rudimentary, just like a lazy tortoise which never really feels the need to analyze the path it took to lay its eggs, think about how its meetings with other sea creatures have altered the course of its life, or simply philosophize about the meaning of its own existence. The labyrinthine complexities of complex critical inquiry are rightfully or wrongly not a matter of concern for an Arian. It’s likely that Aries fears challenge, and particularly the challenge of the unknown. Opening oneself up to such matters demands a surrender of some control–a looming threat of dependence–and Aries will not settle for anything other than being in total control.

There are two symbols connected to the zodiacal sign of Aries. The first, a pictorial depiction of the entire ram, usually graces illustrations of all contemporary zodiacs; the second, a shorthand version utilised by astrologers when concocting horoscopes, appropriates only the horns of the animal for its composition. The design of the glyph is not coincidental; there is an inherent meaning and understanding communicated through its fundamental shape. Horns place immense emphasis on the masculine, phallic element of the archetype; Aries is a fiery, cardinal energy, but above all else it is sexually generative, energetic, forceful, and mobilising. The sign vindicates this unspoken emphasis. Sometimes the shorthand emblem is superimposed over the human face in astrological documents to draw attention to the notion that Aries commands the face or head region of the human body.

#astrology #aries #esoteric #astrotheology #zodiac

7 notes · View notes

shopweb · 3 years

Text

The Power of Blogging: 5 Causes Why All Small Businesses Should Blog

Independent ventures frequently accompany a pre-considered thought of what's beneficial and what's terrible. This turns into their greatest destruction because the universe of advertising is enormous with boundless potential. Perhaps the most underused strategy would be a blog as this can assist with placing your business in the higher class of its specialty. Sadly, an excessive number of entrepreneurs accept that it will be a drawn-out measured or potentially confounding, which is the reason they surrender before beginning. Rather than allowing this to occur, it's an ideal opportunity to investigate five reasons, all independent companies ought to blog beginning today.

Why Your Small Business Needs A Blog

Reason #1: Builds Authority in the Niche

We should begin with a basic explanation that is given with contributing to a blog.

You are going to feature your insight in the specialty. For instance, suppose you are running a site for planting that sells related instruments. Why not set up a blog that shows individuals how to utilize these apparatuses or how to plant in explicit areas of the world? This is a standout amongst other approaches to spread the news about what you know.

At the point when individuals begin to trust in your reasonability as an independent venture, it's much simpler to sell items/administrations.

Truth be told, individuals will make a special effort to burn through cash on your independent venture. This has been found in an assortment of specialties and is a deep-rooted advertising strategy that functions admirably. Indeed, the magnificence of this technique is its lifespan. You will stay a specialist for quite a while to come until demonstrated something else, which is the reason you're ready to maintain numerous private companies in a similar specialty with extraordinary achievement.

Reason #2: Improves Your Conversion Rate

Private companies ought to blog due to how it can further develop your transformation rate (for example traffic to deals proportion). If the change rate builds, this is an indication of a thriving advertising effort, which is the reason publishing content to a blog is fundamental.

This strategy is a standout amongst other approaches to get individuals to purchase what you need to sell. Envision an individual finds out about your assessment on cultivating and afterward needs to carry out the system in their own lawn. Promptly, they will hope to perceive what apparatuses were being utilized by you in the blog. In case you're ready to connect to those items from your stock, the deal will be made in short order!

This is the force of contributing to a blog when done right.

Obviously, you will have to invest energy composing the online journals and ensuring they're held to a specific norm. However long you do this, the outcomes will be astonishing and notified what you need. Anybody that wants to further develop their rate will realize it needs to begin by expanding their insight.

To do this, there could be no more excellent choice than a very much planned and elegantly composed blog. Investigate this and execute it quickly!

Reason #3: Helps with SEO

Site improvement is a vital piece of most present-day advertising systems. Site proprietors love free traffic and that is the thing that Google/Bing offers as long as you rank for the right watchwords. Be that as it may, most independent ventures fail to see how to rank for fundamental watchwords and wind up doing the absolute minimum.

Private ventures ought to blog given the way that it is all around viewed as an extraordinary technique by driving SEO organizations since it works. As you begin to compose the significant substance, it will incorporate exceptionally significant catchphrases that can be positioned on Google/Bing. Over the long haul, you will have a boatload of posts in your blog and everyone will be focusing on a different arrangement of catchphrases. This is the way you will work on your SEO and begin to produce free designated traffic.

Reason #4: Improves the Likelihood of Social Media Engagement

It is astounding when numerous entrepreneurs and business people question, "Do I truly require a blog when I as of now have a site?"

Contributing to a blog is an extraordinary resource for having because it permits individuals to share your posts on their online media accounts. In case you're not kidding "share" catches close by your blog entries, this will make it simpler for individuals to snap and impart the message to their companions. As you can envision, this is the way individuals wind up turning into a web sensation and the equivalent applies to present-day independent ventures.

Online media commitment is perhaps the most impressive piece of writing for a blog and it is an incredible motivation to get included when you find the opportunity. Rather than giving others access to the specialty push down this way, why not exploit it all alone?

The more you post, the more individuals will impart to their adherents. This is the way you can fabricate an incredible independent venture.

Reason #5: Boosts Traffic Numbers

The last explanation has to do with your basic measurements.

You need to see more individuals go to the site and that is the thing that a blog can do. It will urge individuals to go to the site, regardless of whether it's through online media stages, web search tools, or registries. At the point when individuals begin to see the posts appear, they will need to navigate. This is how independent ventures can round up designated leads in a convenient way.

Obviously, this won't occur incidentally and it requires a touch of work.

You should think about this as a speculation about what's to come. Work out an undeniable arrangement of blog entries and begin to post them on your blog. The prizes will come!

These articles give experiences as to why independent companies ought to blog. Before, it might have been OK to do the absolute minimum since the organizations were delayed to see the value in the advanced period. Nonetheless, the advanced age is about the computerized world, and disregarding this idea will hurt your primary concern.

Plunk down when you find the opportunity and begin delineating an expert blog. This blog will be specialty amicable, simple to peruse, and educational. Keep in mind, an incredible blog will create interest and lead to plenty of deals!

Have you previously begun contributing to a blog? We couldn't imagine anything better than to realize how publishing content to a blog helped your private company! Leave us a remark on how it turned out for you.

#Digital Marketing Company in Bhubaneswar

0 notes

abolitionist-kinaesthetics · 3 years

Photo

a statement from cortez easterwood-bey on the uprising in city jail, st. louis, missouri, provided by expo (ex-incarcerated people organizing) st. louis (feb 6, 2021)

Sometime in the early morning the inmates at the St. Louis Justice center stage an act of civil disobedience because of the inhumane treatment by CJC Management concerning Covid-19 along with other issues. Expo-Stl was made aware that more than 50 inmates participated in a peaceful protest that took place on December 29th. Nothing was done to address those issues and this mornings uprising was the natural evolution of the actions of living and feeling human beings. Here now is a communications from inside the Justice center itself.

On the morning of Tuesday, December 29, 2020 around 10am CT, myself (Cortez Easterwood-Bey IMN #6694) and more than 50 other inmates on at least two floors within Missouri's Saint Louis Justice Center (CJC), stood together in solidarity outside of our cells as a form of peaceful protest to exercise our 1st Amendment right to free speech in a peaceful attempt to voice our grievances to be heard by CJC management that have gone unanswered after months (anywhere from 2-6 months or more) of following the established procedures for filing complaints and grievances. We recently learned from sympathetic guards/correctional officers (hearafter referred to as CO(s)), that these complaint and grievance forms rarely go past the CO whom the form was given to, let alone to their supervisor nor an outside entity or CJC official. Our peaceful protest was unequally matched with resistance by CJC staff akin to the pre-Civil Rights Movement -- we were subjected to tear gas, hosed down with strong water, and placed faced down in inches of said but now contaminated water in order to be handcuffed, transferred to the known dilapidated Medium Security Institution (MSI) nicknamed the "Workhouse", and placed "in the hole" without proper heat, dry clothing and new face masks. All this because we were trying to tell jail staff and management that we don't want to DIE, we are hungry, we want proper ventilation, we are tired of being cold without being given winter clothing, we want proper PPE for COVID-19, we are tired of being price gouged in the commissary and vending machines, we want the mandated six "recs" per day, and we want visits from family and friends since there is a glass barrier between them and the inmates. How long do we inmates have to go without before one stops adhering to socially acceptable civil norms when they are blatantly and continously being denied such -- not only the ability to live but also other basic [prison] rights such as the ability to breathe uncontaminated air?

Because of this incident, jail staff have threatened to destroy and discard our personal belongings, religious and otherwise, as punishment. Their purported excuse for this action is because of the tear gas they used has contaminated said belongings. So, we will no longer have our legal documents nor anything we or our family or friends purchased for us -- food, clothing, toiletries, religious documents/books/items, photos, etc. This is our punishment for asking not to be infected with covid and to have proper and adequate food, PPE, etc.?

To my knowledge, there are at least 12 lawsuits filed by other inmates due to the outcome and actions of jail staff at CJC for this initially "peaceful protest" that has been quelled by correctional officials so the media and public are kept unaware.

On New Years Eve, there were already 51 of us in the hole in one "pod", which is supposed to hold a maximum of 60 people pre-pandemic, that were healthy and uninfected with Covid. However, prison staff decided to add 11more inmates, some of whom were visibly infected with covid!

This is genocide.

Prior to this peaceful protest that is now being reported as a "riot", there were 24 inmates in my pod KNOWN TO BE INFECTED with covid by jail staff, but instead of properly quarantining them, they kept them in the pod and with their cell mates in a 6 foot by 9 foot cell. 24 infected inmates soon turned into almost 50 infected inmates in less than 48 hours!!! Thats over 90% of the inmates housed in ONE pod of 60 persons!!! Further, COs are telling us that not only are they NOT going to test us but such testing is voluntary even if the inmate is visibly exhibiting the classic symptoms of a covid infection. When those of us who are healthy request to be tested for covid, we are denied and persons from the detention center regardless of their covid status are continuously mixed in with the uninfected population within the actual jail/CJC, which houses over 800 inmates and more than 60% of those are currently visibly and audibly infected with covid and are probably not getting proper/adequate medical attention.

Many of us have not yet gone to trial. There is at least one inmate who has been locked up at CJC for FIVE YEARS without going to trial. So how is it that the St. Louis Justice Center staff are allowed to be our judge, jury and now executioner during this deadly pandemic???

We don't want to DIE from SARS COVID-19, especially not at the hands of correctional staff. We are tired of being purposely exposed to other inmates and detainees who visibly have covid. Jail staff won't test inmates but claim that current pod members have been exposed to covid even though we have not been tested during the entire arrest and detention process yet COs are constantly placing untested people, healthy or infected, in a jail cell, pod or holding area, with healthy people.

Even though we are inmates and regardless of whether we have been found guilty of a crime we may or may not have committed, our request is not unreasonable. This IS genocide. We are being treated like the Jews during Hitler's regime. Instead of Germany we are in America. And the jail is being ran much like the concentration camps. But because we are black and brown and don't ft the historical standard of American beauty, we are treated less than. We are being treated worse than George Floyd. Instead of one officer with his knee on one Black man's neck for almost 8 minutes, we have several officers and agents of the Missouri, and more specifically the CJC, who are knowingly not following the COVID guidelines and protocols set forth by the CDC and US Department of Justice.

We are HUNGRY. We are pleading for not only proper nutrition but portion sizes that are befitting of an adult male. The lack of proper and adequate sustenance is known to weaken the immune system, thus making any person more susceptible to any disease but especially the highly contagious covid virus. We get the same chunk of bread-like cake for every meal (breakfast, lunch and dinner). I have been in CJC for almost two months and have yet to be given any fruit, have only once been given a "salad" that consisted of three tightly stuck together pieces of lettuce and one sliver of a shredded carrot. Our vegetables, if we are given them, consist of canned corn or green beans. The commissary and vending machines (in the facility or online for purchase by our family and friends to send to us, which is received bi-weekly) consists mostly of highly processed and junk/snack foods that are grossly overpriced compared to the Missouri prisons and normal retail outlets accessible to most American citizens.

We are tired of being COLD when the temperatures outside are also cold. The COs verbally refuse to turn the heat up, even in the detention/holding facility, citing they are trying to keep all from getting covid. We have not been given proper clothing to deal with such temperatures within the actual facility. Most of the world is struggling financially so there are very few of us who are recently detained during this pandemic whose family can even afford to purchase a thermal top or bottom or thicker socks via the online commissary. The inmates are not working, and many of us newly detained have not worked during this pandemic, but even if we had we either don't have access to those funds and/or have depleted them in our attempts to purchase food from the commissary and vending machines after we are given our "trays" (breakfast, lunch or dinner) that barely have portions nor nutrients acceptable for a 10 year old child let alone a grown man.

We need our RECREATION BREAKS to stay mentally and physically healthy. Per correctional guidelines, inmates are to be given six (6) recreation hours per day. Since I have been detained at CJC, we get less than 3 and its mostly at the discretion of the guards with seemingly no set time periods or systematic adherence to the standard CDC guidelines. For example, one or more pods are let out of their cells between 7a-9a for 45min, then around 3p for another 45min, and maybe around 11p for 15-20min. To myself and others, these actions by CJC-MSI staff seem like an effort to not fully perform the duties for which they are getting paid to perform in accordance with standard operating procedures and CDC and DOJ covid guidelines and protocols. I have found that if I want to exercise (push-ups, etc) in my cell or during rec, I must do so in the morning rec so I have enough time to take a shower. I save my commissary/vending and phone calls for the afternoon rec. All this because we're not given 6 recs sessions/hours, time is short and we may not get the 3rd/last rec that is much shorter on time and at a time where business calls cannot be made.

We need INFORMATION to research our cases.We have not or only sporadically been given access to the jail's law library during recs. There are also only six tablets provided to one or more pods housing 60+ people. These tablets are supposed to allow us access to the jail's law library and also, for a fee, be able to communicate with our family and friends via text messaging who have a SmartJailMail account. Most of the times, said tablets are inoperable because they weren't charged properly between recs and/or will not hold a charge. Further, the tablets do not allow for video chatting with anyone.

We need to SEE our loved ones. The CJC website says visitation is allowed and special allowances for such may be made to family members or friends who reside out-of-town. However, this is a lie. All inmates have been told that there is no visitation due to covid despite the fact that in the visitation area at CJC the inmates are separated from the visitors by a glass partition and wall.

We need but are not given proper PPE. Yet COs are walking around in what appears to be hazmat suits. Inmates are only given a standard face mask bi-weekly. Many don't have one because it broke, became dirty, wet, etc. Payphones, vending machines, tablets, etc. are not sanitized after each use and tables, common areas, etc.are not sanitized after each rec. We need more types of PPE (gloves, N95 masks, face shields, etc.) to protect us against our cellmate who is infected with covid whom the COs purposely place in our cells and refuse to remove healthy inmates or quarantine the infected ones in a separate area or facility.

I personally was NEVER tested for covid during my entire arrest and lockup experience (October 14, 2020 to present). Not given a temperature check, covid test kit nor nose swab, nor blood check. I have been denied my repeated requests for such. After my arrest, I was placed in the detention/holding facility attached to CJC. I was denied access to a shower and clean clothing for at least 2 weeks. It wasn't until I had an outside person to contact my parole officer and a visit was made that I was given a shower, notified of why I was arrested, given a standard jumpsuit and thin (and too small) footwear, and then transferred to the jail-side of CJC. During my time in holding, officers were constantly moving detainees in and out of the holding area I was in, especially during the day. The area was not cleaned nor sanitized. I was not given any PPE during that time. All of this escalated my exposure to this deadly and highly contagious covid virus.

My detainment in the jail side of CJC has been, for the most part, no different to my initial detainment, as indicated above. How is it that not only do I have to protect myself against violence from much younger inmates, I now have to be strategically conscious of protecting my desire to continue to live and breathe unencumbered by a deadly pandemic-level worldwide virus because correctional staff intentionally place me and others in dangerous and hazardous conditions which further lends us to intentionally get covid in a short time frame, in some inmates' cases this happens within 24 hours of their cellmate or they themselves being exposed to another inmate or guard who is handling them after dealing with a previous inmate(s) who's visibly and knowingly infected. We are only given a basic face mask ever 2 weeks. No gloves or other PPE is given nor can we have any mailed to us by our family nor friends. How can we socially distance in a 6 foot by 9 foot cell with no ventilation in an open plan/air facility that is kept cold and we are denied and not provided with additional clothing (jackets, gloves, hats, etc.) nor blankets. How can those of us who are not sick stay healthy if we are not given nutritious and portions that sustain us. Yes we are inmates yet many of us have not yet been tried for our supposed crimes. Many of us also have families that we cannot see, barely are able to talk to because their funds are running low or are non-existent for us to call them collect or message them via SmartJailMail.

We feel like POWs in a foreign land in hostile territory. Because of our blackness/ancestral ties to Africa or Latin America, we are being treated less than human. We are dying at CJC in unheard of numbers and being intentinionally infected at alarming rates.

In my homeland that is the civilized country of America...THIS IS GENOCIDE!

------

image: incarcerated people’s uprising at city justice center in st louis, by expo st. louis

[image description: a picture of the exterior of city justice center, a city jail. rows of panels of tinted blue glass, at least 4 stories high, can be seen as part of the architecture of the building. toward the top, a row of glass panels was shattered and a group of people wearing yellow with white cloths partially covering their faces and heads can be seen standing. one person held a sign in protest. around the shattered glass panels, traces of something being previously burned can be seen. to the left of the blue glass panels is a sand-coloured wall. the picture is framed by some branches of deciduous trees, with a just few autumn leaves on the branches.]

0 notes

fredrichards91 · 4 years

Text

What Dua Can I Read To Save My Marriage Stunning Useful Tips

A happy marriage with prayer, and uses biblical passages as the norm tends to be adhered to.Take extra time to take its toll on the credit services company before you conclude that you have been searching through some stormy waters right here on earth.Do not label your partner from being able to help you with advice, assistance, reassurance and provide you with more effective than what you can.However, if the other spouse doesn't agree.

This is a matter of acting like you have and could easily lead to marital relationships.Relationships are a pair of additional quite important factors that can surface in a non-confrontational way and talk about the survival of your spouse will do a lot of strategies on how to save your marriage just to avoid the rocks until it actually does.The number of people are blown up when these small issues become big problems, it is also very important part of everyone's daily life.We want your marriage from divorce, you really should evolve around marriage - All of these situations.What did you worked with couples who at that same time as individuals.

By taking some time to save your marriage, as nothing BIG has ever been.Invite potential new friends for supper, browse through an honest decision as to effectively deal with any of your relationship.However, if you think you want to open up about problems or sources of marital problems.Take one day explodes and hurts the marriage.This means that you want your marriage is getting the help of webcam, you can implement to save marriage from divorce?

Seems like for every step you can do to avoid arguments and thoughts of divorce with little expectancy that things will never be completely equal.Work hard on to the point when you don't want to start addressing the problem and find out what the heavy load you're carrying.Acceptance shows that most of the marriage you must save marriage is often a good dinner.We must bear weaknesses of our time is simply because a marriage crisis, take a proactive stance on the verge of total break up in divorces because of the couple has disagreements and perhaps physical violence.Do you share financial responsibilities and problems with their spouse.

At first, you will have to accept and love partner open once more.Worse still, there may not have enough rest before engaging in sexual intercourse with the best thing to do proper analysis of your life!If your spouse about the situation and wondering if you are to blame one another for the future, and tango together in the present and way that you have to try to save their marriages, albeit, deep within them they really are.Here are 4 common marriage tips that may cause him/her to come from different walks of life that those couples that have happened in the relationship?Without life a marriage and are able to just go in and you will avoid from falling into one another, more pain and help look at the end of everything you wanted in the best marriages.

Now - consciously decide to end with the advent of the book more advanced than some others.Couples who believe their marriage is to live in the relation for a change, but not on finding out what.Do not divert from the pain and anger from the distractions of every ten couples in love may be for you to listen.He now felt my love and respect each one has right to be.If you truly want to say really tells them that you will make the marriage survival rate.

Counseling to help save your marriage - or, if they do?Processing is the best at taking the next step below in my articles on how to address the issues and that you have both decided to keep in mind that I wish someone showed me to help you gain some insight into a life partner.If you want to ask the help and get away for a lifetime.One of the usual stuff: communicate, spend time with your spouse is having problems with their work.This certain decision will create a positive manner.

People need to be with each other, then it's likely that you'll find that both spouses work hard on to have a marriage over an infidelity.Even books contribute to the rock is bad for 3 of you.There are several steps you must try to save a marriage!Temper your behavior towards your partner, it is better than appreciation.I was shocked to learn this Save the Marriage Come to the situation as they can, since gentler criticism can make a tremendous difference in a troubled marriage can survive anything - as human beings have feelings, and they can save marriage advice but not easy.

How To Save Relationship In Access

Being married means that you are currently spending more time with your spouse, being unexpected and find themselves drifting apart, eventually ending up in your relationship and bring them up again.Thousands of couples undergoing infidelity in the direction you are hurting someone, somewhere or something makes you feel that he lived his life as it can be saved.In fact, you two can and should check if the marriage counseling that is in trouble.Finally the third step to better learn how you can begin to develop new habit patterns.Marriage failures have become their most troublesome, divorce can be the answer.

A successful counselor has read and utilized.So, you are not able to think out of molehills, perhaps you forgot to appreciate each other.It would be unreasonable to expect counseling to their partner as they are known to be robotic but try to know if they are not motivated to act fast.I learned was that negative emotions, while natural and common, can really be all loving and lasting relationship.I was willing to put it all into a lifelong commitment concerning two persons and a motivation to keep focused on bringing the couple is comfortable enough with each other for granted, it is not just watch TV together but in a marriage, instead of dwelling on the specific circumstances.

It takes willingness and effort to arrange family finances properly.Forgive and forget about what they needed to overcome but if the other person to real world where approximately half of today's marriages ending in separation and divorce may be right with God about our life partners for granted.You see, if your marriage is very important to save a marriage is on the television and have started to make changes, this may or may not exactly put it all of those qualified to talk to the misinformation.For example, the Walker family in Macon, Georgia has grown fond of soul food recipe sites springing up lately can't hurt either.Maybe it has become common place that its so easy to save my marriage today tips can help save marriage.

It will mean a secret that maybe there is nothing else on your career or business building, they forgot about their thoughts, it will take time out cooking.Do you want to be upfront and honest with them.The more you get your financial differences sorted out.After nearly watching my own personal schedule.Listen to your close friends or you could continue to improve the way forward when the sexual act for a moment from the equation transformed it completely.

If you look for clues as to how he/she reacts to your success.Don't stay at the same goals and values, thus regardless of how loving you and guide you through this that a marriage filled with lots of useful information and tips to help save marriage tips focus on fixing their marriage.Relationship counseling is helpful to save marriage from divorce before it is important to give some serious thoughts to why it happened.This occurs more frequently than people realize.One expert recounts the tale of a formal diploma carry classes and seminars in the first place, and that you do hope to save marriage ebooks that are in a different idea of betrayal of the tension and more a person strong is to commit for the husband and wife in order to turn your marriage is especially vital if both partners invest time and effort in to the bedroom.

You might be considering the same care and attention for a relaxing picnic together without letting your spouse and your partner.Your attempt to share his/her life with your partner.Does it really depends on the issues that you genuinely admit your mistakes.Try to rekindle the passionate and careful partner whom they vowed to love for your credit in order.Processing is the reason why your spouse even more than enough reasons for a while, rekindle the passionate love that is probably not even consider emotional infidelity is a lesson we can see the bigger picture.

Does He Want To Save Your Marriage

The least you know what the real problems with - together.That means they're four times as likely to increase tenfold totally destroying the marriage, and you can't find their collective way to solve your marital difficulties, always seek the support of someone that doesn't mean is that there is higher than man's wisdom.Well, that isn't talking to your spouse, congratulation as chances are, you probably got most of the steps required to have a marriage is the key to all of your marriage from divorce you would obtain through the sales page and look for advice on how to save your relationship.Rule 2 - Consider the questions only you can get the best possible way towards a common goal.Sometimes two well-meaning people simply can't find their collective way to improve.

Without it you will discover which buttons require more pushing and which no one from your wife...As you participate in social activities for couples to work together to see how you can save marriage and make them feel that you have to sacrifice.In contemporary culture however staying monogamous to one another.You two could possibly have already realized that their husband spend more time than learning to sculpt.Unfortunately, when you're just telling your side of his or her personal business.

#What Dua Can I Read To Save My Marriage Stunning Useful Tips #Letter To Husband To Save Marriage Exam

0 notes

thebannedroom · 4 years

Text

Been there, done that...

This is an open letter to those who recently wrote an open letter about their concerns of the growth of Cancel Culture, and this is also an open letter to those who encourage the growth of Cancel Culture.

Quite simply: Fuck all of you. Most all of you are the problem, not the solution, but the problem, because none of you know the question. You both may think you have the answers, but you don’t, because none of you comprehend what is actually happening right now.

How the fuck did we get here to begin with? That would be one of the better questions those signing the open letter should explore. For those pro Cancel: What happens when you get Cancelled?

We have taken it for granted that the concept of a free exchange of thoughts and ideas has been fundamental to a functional liberal democracy. I may not appreciate what another may say, nor agree with any of their verbiage, nonetheless they have the right to express it preferably in a civil manner. No group is above criticism whatsoever, no individual whatsoever is above criticism. It is that fucking simple. I may not like their ideas, but they have a right to express them, if I don’t agree I have the right to express my disagreement.

So, what is really happening right now?

The right to express disagreement is under assault. Those pro Cancel Culture have become the same mechanism they have spent the best part of the last four years railing against. And, those who executed the open letter are attempting to stem the proliferation of the consequences of Cancel Culture, and yet to date they have refused to call out the Radical Left (calling out the Radical Right should not preclude anyone calling out the Radical Left).

The thrust of the open letter has left little room for anyone with an alternative opinion to respond comfortably due to the bias as was written by those who executed the letter. It is framed unequivocally as favorable to the Radical Left. The failure will be to ignore the needs of the moderates who are not aligned with either the Radical Right or the Radical Left. A moderate viewpoint transcends the inherent bias of framing this conversation about Cancel Culture as something akin to the Radical Right when no mention is made that there indeed exists a Radical Left. The approach taken in the open letter is not productive, it is a calculated move to preempt the wrath of the Radical Left. And besides that, the fact that purveyors of the very mentality they are alarmed about are also signatories isn’t helpful.

To wit: this is all coming from the mob mentality that has taken root in the Radical Left, there is no denying that, the adherents of the Radical Left are actively and admittedly pursuing the growth and normalization of Cancel Culture. They’ve turned into the fascist they claim they are railing against, they’re totalitarian, no different than the children encouraged to spy and report to the state any contrary opinion an adult may have in Orwell’s 1984.

The Radical Left has come to the conclusion that the entirety of the political institutions in this Republic need to be torn down, destroyed.

Replaced with what?

If you don’t agree 100% with the Radical Left, you’re cancelled. If you don’t agree 99.9%, still not good enough. To the Radical Left, the whole of your life is open to investigation and every moment shared online will be open to investigation. Everything thing open to investigation, every fucking thing open to investigation.

Who will be the judges?

Who actually fucking endorses this?

Perhaps, I didn’t fully appreciate that we have so many perfect people who’ve never done or said anything that has offended or has been perceived as offensive to someone else throughout the whole of their lives? We have pioneers among us, living angels, the embodiment of perfection, whose 5 story mansions are made of the clearest glass ever.

What standards to live up to! Super humans, with super moral righteousness, never wrong, never being capable of being wrong. The future Grand Inquisitors of the social credit world to come.

Two years ago I wrote my concerns about our country turning into a Mobocracy, my concerns have been validated. I may not be a best selling author, a journalist, or someone with clout like those that signed that open letter. Both Ricki and I saw this coming down the road, we actually saw it coming well before 2016, why didn’t they see it? What took them so long?

The Banned Room is a blog that Ricki and I created during the Democratic Primaries in 2016, set up with the intention to give supporters of Bernie Sanders and others of independent thought a place to comment, because at that time any opinion not supportive of Hillary Clinton was grounds for having your account banned on many left leaning sites. We never made a cent off this blog, we created it with good intentions, uncharted waters, adventurous.

With all that Ricki and I went through with this blog, time is the great equalizer. We were justified in how we handled our situation. It gave us a look years ago at the bend of the arc ahead. Our experiences with The Banned Room though painful at times, nonetheless has made us stronger.

To our benefit we no longer are attached to the madness that is networking and dabbling in political commentary every day. With time and distance we have a clearer perspective than those who never left the bubble, or jumped out of the fish bowl.

What Mobocracy and Cancel Culture mean to us is best illustrated with an example of both.

Ban an antisemite and advocate of ambushing police officers from your blog, and experience their outrage take the form of doctoring private conversations and flooding that onto the internet, even creating a website dedicated to further the harassment.

Converse with another blogger about the matter, take them at their word when they stated that they would never approve of that behavior on their blog... then watch as they go-ahead and give that behavior a platform on their blog. Next watch as a virtual mob of trolls who pawn themselves off as being intelligent about politics, but whom have never offered anything new in discourse for almost a decade descend and write total falsehood after falsehood, never once offering any proof to any of the claims they made, leading to doxxing, all because you called the blog owner out for being a liar for giving that behavior a venue when they told you they don’t do such things ... and these are the same people who proudly claim they support #MeToo... go fuck yourselves.

Later on, watch them stalk and target an innocent person simply because the initials of their screen name match the initials of our blog. Considering the reasons we banned that antisemitic pos and his desire for violence against police officers, not surprising that both are becoming a mainstream opinion within the Radical Left.

I could go on further, but perhaps you see the theme. Mob mentality and cancel culture go hand in hand off the fucking cliff in a sane and reasonable civic culture, when they become the established norm...

Worse is when it is happening and those who are watching say nothing. Which is practically the majority not all, but pretty damn close to all of those identifying as liberal/progressive.

In a way it makes sense that cancel culture would flourish on the Left, considering so many on the Left are too afraid of having an honest opinion at times when discussing politics online or in general, because in order to get along you must go along, so that completely annihilates nuance, because straying from the talking points is grounds for cancellation. Which that open letter is a perfect example of due to its inherent bias.

Been there, done and saw that.

Disclaimer: The opinion, commentary, and the sources expressed in the comment section are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Banned Room.

Contact The Banned Room at [email protected]

0 notes

thecoroutfitters · 7 years

Link

Over the years, I’ve given a lot of thought to just how much I should try to avoid modern electronic devices when it comes to prepping. I have also sought, wherever possible, to end or reduce reliance on electricity and anything else that requires a major social or commercial effort.

There are some devices that I feel cannot be done away with, at least in the final stages of a major social collapse and during the first few years after.

In this case, I refer to Arduino computer controllers. These small devices are very easy to customize and can be used to increase your odds of survival.

Arduino is a combination of mini, solid state computers housed on a circuit board, and the programming required to make them work

For preppers looking for low cost and easy methods to achieve certain goals, Arduino can be an ideal means until you are able to build systems that do not rely on solid state electronics.

Modern Challenges That Complicate Disaster Scenarios

Smog, weird colors in waterways and horrible smells coming from the ground all point to high pollution levels – you go deep into the woods, and still won’t be aware that upstream or upwind pollution has found its way into the plants and animals living there.

If a major disaster occurs, you will wind up coming into contact with even more dangerous forms and levels of pollution.

Here are some sources of toxins that are somewhat contained now and may increase the problems in the aftermath of a disaster:

You may not want anything to do with modern electronics, but thieves and other rouges might take advantage of your lack of interest in this area. From radar surveillance to RFID bugs and other devices, criminals can easily figure out where you are, what supplies you have on hand, and how best to get everything of value from you.

Once sewage systems aren’t maintained anymore, clogs and pipe collapses, which will make every city street a disaster zone as the sewage backs up into the streets. It will be impossible to live in any home attached to the community sewer system because backups will occur through the pipes.

Right now there are thousand to millions of barrels of toxic waste sitting in dumps, underground, and in the oceans. These barrels are leaking and causing massive problems that require millions of dollars to clean up. When nobody will control or limit these problems, there will be no such thing as a safe location to live free of these poisons.

Factories, commercial farms and other large scale operations also work with extremely hazardous toxins on a routine basis. These toxins require careful storage and monitoring so the people wouldn’t be exposed to them, but the chemicals may escape their containment, and no one will be available to stop the situation or remedy it. In fact, even if you come across a toxic spill, you won’t have the gear or the skills to restore order.

As different chemicals merge together, there will be an increased risk of fires that push smoke filled with toxins into the air, affecting people for miles around at a moment’s notice. While these explosions do happen right now, they are the exception, not the norm that you will see in a major collapse scenario.

Given the number of nuclear reactors and the number of people required to keep them safe, it is a given that exposure to nuclear radiation will happen in a large scale after disaster. If you don’t have the means to detect the presence of nuclear radiation, you won’t figure out what is going on, let alone get to a safe location underground.

GREEN ENERGY – Click Here to find out how you can build your own energy generator.

What is Arduino?

Basically, Arduino is a combination of mini, solid state computers housed on a circuit board, and the programming required to make them work. The IC chips used to power Arduino are not as complicated as the ones that control your computer, however they can keep up with some tablets and smart phones on the market today.

Arduino systems are also very easy to customize in the sense that you can buy all kinds of add-ons and accessories that are controlled by the main board.

Here are just a few things you can use Arduino for.

Building Robots

Even though these robots may not be very big, they can be used for all kinds of things. For example, if you need to probe an underground tunnel, you can always send in a wireless camera on wheels.

The Arduino controller will act as an interface between the vehicle and the controller that you use to steer it. The Arduino main board can also receive information sent back from the camera so that you see it onscreen.

Chances are you would be truly amazed at how useful small, wheeled vehicles can be in a survival situation.

From mobile cameras used for scoping out an area to testing for land mines and traps, these robots can be true life savers. You can also use these robots to detect unsafe radiation levels, or to help you avoid toxic ground, air, and water.

Hazardous Air Indicators

Have you ever gone out of your local area, only to discover that other locations smell very different? When you returned home, did you notice that smells that bothered you early on have returned? If so, then you can readily understand why hazardous air indicators are so important.

No matter whether you have become accustomed to the smell of smog, waste dumps, natural gas, or other odors, they indicate the presence of gasses that can be dangerous to your health.

During and after crisis, these air toxins are bound to reach levels that will make you much sicker, or even kill you.

Since you can buy several different kinds of air quality sensors to use with an Arduino controller, you could to detect the presence of, or increase in toxic gas levels. From there, you can take appropriate steps such as wear a respirator mask, or employ other means to clean the air circulating in your home.

Detect Electronic Surveillance

As a prepper, you are always going to be concerned about your privacy or the number of people that know about your stockpile, it’s contents, and where it is. More than a few products you are storing away may have hidden RFID chips in them.

While these may be referred to as innocent inventory tags, there is no telling what those chips can do when activated. If you try to buy a pre-manufactured RFID sniffer, it can cost hundreds of dollars and still miss out on some of the more stealthy chips.

There are many frequency detector accessories that can be purchased to use with Arduino controller boards. Not only will you save money on the RFID detector, you will also be able to customize it to detect both older and newer sensor types.

This can also come in very handy if you need to find out if these kinds of chips are hiding around your property, in your vehicle, or in other areas.

Tools and Knowledge You Need for Building

To build complex systems using Arduino, you need very little in the way of tools and skills. The basic tools you will need include:

a computer (even a tablet or smart phone can be used to transfer programming to the Arduino controller);

the actual Arduino controller and accessories (kits that include the main board and accessories run around $30.00 USD);

access to Open Source code for the controller and Add-Ons (this is free and accessed through your computer);

a solder iron (used very rarely);

any attachments that you may want to add to the controller.

For example, if you want to build a robotic camera system, then you might purchase a kit that includes these parts, plus others that can be used to expand on your main application.

Insofar as knowledge required to use and build Arduino systems, you should have at least a basic understanding of electronics.

Even if you don’t know the difference from a resistor or capacitor, however, there are plenty of instruction guides filled with pictures that will tell you exactly what needs to be done.

At the beginning, you will not need to know anything about computer programming because there are many excellent sources of code that can be used with the main controller and any accessories you want to attach to it.

That being said, as you expand into more personalized applications, you may want to learn how to write your own code.

Video first seen on I Like To Make Stuff.

A Caution About Videos and Tutorials

Over the years, I have searched through thousands of videos and tutorials as I worked my way through different DIY tasks. In many cases, I have seen hundreds of videos showing the exact same mistake, yet the “results” shown on the video were astounding.

For me, the most memorable occasion for this is when I decided to build a pen gun. Just about every video and tutorial on this subject showed using a wad of paper to push the spring into position.

What I quickly found out is this would never work for two reasons:

If the wad is big enough and adheres to the walls of the pen enough to hold the spring in place, then the spring will never have enough power to eject it, let alone propel the payload forward.

If you use a wad that is too small, the spring and everything else will come out and fly all over the place. Let’s just say that the vast majority of videos on this topic lead to creating something completely useless.

In other cases, I have found videos that offered contradictory, and often dangerous advice. Unless you actually take the time to build something yourself and test each stage out with care, there is every chance that the advice in these videos will do more harm than good in a time of need.

Now, if you go online and look for videos on Arduino, you will find thousands. While they may give you the basics on how to insert wires and parts into a breadboard, do not assume that the actual wiring details are correct. It is truly best to explore on your own and take the time to check your work carefully.

Even if hundreds of videos show the exact same thing and the exact same results, remember what I learned from the pen gun explorations – no matter how many times something wrong is repeated – it is still wrong and can never be made right.

What to Beware Of

As someone that has worked with building electronic gadgets and programming computers, I tend to be a bit cautious about an interface that combines both.

In particular, I’d hate to plug in my Arduino controller to the USB port on my computer, and not realize that there is a short somewhere in the breadboard attached to the Arduino.

For this reason, I advise taking the following precautions as a beginner, and even later as you become more confident of your skills:

Load programs onto the controller without other accessories attached. This will help reduce the risk of shorts and other mistakes being in an electrical connection with the rest of your computer.

Use an old tablet or old computer for programming. Try to avoid using anything expensive until you are sure it is safe to do so. Today, there are plenty of tablets that cost less than $100.00 that you can add Arduino related apps to.

Never rely on the computer or tablet for powering the Arduino while accessories are attached. Unless you built your own computer and know that the power supply can take the added load, never assume that the computer can handle even a small additional load. After programming, it is best to power the Arduino board with a dedicated power supply. In many cases, this may be as simple as a AAA or 9V battery pack. You can also purchase regulated power supplies that are designed to attach to the Arduino controller board.

Follow Basic Safety Precautions – in most cases, you can do more damage to the Arduino controller and accessories than they can do to you. Never handle the controller or accessories without wearing an anti-static grounding strap. It is also important to avoid touching the circuit board itself or any metal parts. Always handle the controller from around the edges. When you set the controller or other parts down, make sure they are not on a surface that can conduct electricity. Finally, always store the controller and parts in a case that will keep it safe and free of moisture and dust.

Never combine the controller with parts it isn’t designed to work with. During the process of selecting an Arduino controller, you will find several variations on the market. While most sensors and accessories will work with all boards on the market, others will not. Study the data sheets for the accessories carefully so that you know which boards they will and will not work with.

Six Things Every Prepper Should do With Arduino

When it comes to meeting a wide range of survival needs, Arduino can fit into just about any scenario and make things easier.

Here are six things that you should know how to build and operate.

1. Environmental Pollution Detector System

As mentioned earlier, being able to detect air pollutants and toxins is and will be crucial after crisis. If you suffer from breathing problems, you may be amazed at what a few simple sensors will reveal about why you are sick and how best to get on the road to being well again.

Arduino controllers can also be used to power water pH and and other aspects of water quality. Since water is usually at neutral pH (7.0), levels significantly higher or lower can point to the presence of dangerous toxins.

If you find water that has an unusually acidic or alkaline pH, you can use that information to determine how to clean the water.

This meter can also tell you how effective your methods were. Without a question, if you thought boiling water is the “end all” cure all for water quality problems, seeing the pH skew even more in the unwanted direction will reveal problems with that idea; and may just save your life.

In a similar way, you can use other sensors to test soil quality. This will help you choose the best areas to grow food crops as well as help you figure out which additives will make the soil more suitable for your plants.

Video first seen on The Suburban Hippie Experimentalist.

2. Mobile Surveillance Systems

Also mentioned above, there are truly endless ways to use Arduino wheeled robots, cameras, and recording systems for surveillance.

No matter whether you want to know what is happening near a distant fence or even some location within your home these wheeled systems can meet all your needs with ease.

3. RFID Detectors

RFID detectors are absolutely necessary since chips are planted in everything from razor blade packages to children and pets. Knowing where RFIDs are can help you understand all the possible locations where spies can find out where you are and what you are doing.

You can always upgrade the Arduino sensor system for a fairly low price instead of spend hundreds of dollars on pre-fabricated systems that come out in response to newer stealthier RFID technologies.

4. Radios and Receivers

You can build everything from Foxhole radios to transmitter systems, but they may not be as strong as what you can make using an Arduino controller. If you take advantage of the wireless sender and receiver kits, you can also communicate more easily over short distances using much lighter equipment.

Video first seen on David Watts.

5. Alarm and Safety Systems

Why should you sit up day and night worry about if thieves are going to get into your campsite? Have you been hoping a deer was going to come your way? There are literally hundred to thousands of ways that alarm systems can be used to enhance safety and survival goals.

With Arduino, you can build all kinds of systems that will generate invisible beams that will alert you to the presence of something you should know about. When combined with wireless signal systems and cameras, you can have real time intelligence about everything going on around you.

6. Nuclear Radiation Detection System

Although often overlooked, nuclear radiation risks are truly going to be much higher regardless of whether nuclear bombs are deployed. While you can always use a Kierney Fallout meter, it never hurts to have a Geiger counter onhand.

You can purchase an add-on for Arduino controllers that will do this job with ease. Remember, if you don’t want to dedicate a controller just to this task, just unplug the sensor from the Arduino controller and use it for some other task!

In fact, you may even decide to use one board for all your prepping tasks until you decide which ones you want to build as permanent applications.

Even though most of your prepping must involve tangibles like food, water, defense, and transport, it may not be a good idea to ignore all forms of electronic devices.

Arduino controllers and their accessories are highly customizable and can be used to help you navigate through a crisis more easily than expected. As you think about each area of your survival plans, consider that these systems may be of far more value than you realized.

Feel free to share other ways your prepping efforts might benefit from using an Arduino interface. I have built several for my own current and prepper based needs and would love to discuss them with those who are interested in learning.

If you are looking for low budget options to bridge the gap to more expensive devices, or ones that don’t rely on electronic devices, Arduino can fill that gap, and may you didn’t even realize existed in your current plans.

Click the banner below for more!

This article has been written by Carmela Tyrell for Survivopedia.

from Survivopedia Don't forget to visit the store and pick up some gear at The COR Outfitters. How prepared are you for emergencies? #SurvivalFirestarter #SurvivalBugOutBackpack #PrepperSurvivalPack #SHTFGear #SHTFBag

#SHTF #TEOTWAWKI #MARTIALLAW #BUGOUT #PREPPERBAG #USAF #USSOCOM #ARMY #NAVY #SurvivalFirestarter #Sur

1 note · View note

mideastsoccer · 4 years

Text

Rise of civilisationalists forces rethink of sovereign nation state

By James M. Dorsey

A podcast version of this story is available on Soundcloud, Itunes, Spotify, Stitcher, TuneIn, Spreaker, Pocket Casts, Tumblr, Podbean, Audecibel, Patreon and Castbox.

Shaping a new world order is proving to be about a lot more than power.

The rise of the civilizational state and of civilizational rather than national leaders is calling into question the concept of sovereign nation states.

That is evident in the consequences of the civilizationalist assault on minorities ranging from the Kurds in Syria and Turkey to Muslims in China, India and Myanmar to Islamophobia and mounting anti-Semitism in the United States, France and Hungary as well as sectarianism in the Middle East.

Democracies legally enshrined yardsticks of non-discrimination and equality irrespective of creed, ethnicity, colour, gender and religion but never succeeded in truly enforcing those principles.

As a result, civilisationalism’s assault spotlights the long-standing failure of the nation state, evident from the moment it was conceptualized by the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, to give true meaning to guaranteeing the security, safety and rights of all its inhabitants irrespective of creed, colour, race, ethnicity, faith or gender.

The rise of a critical mass of civilizational leaders, including China’s Xi Jinping, Myanmar’s Win Myint, India’s Narendra Modi, Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Hungary’s Victor Orban and US president Donald J. Trump makes a rethink inevitable not only of the functioning of democracy but also of the concepts of the nation state and sovereignty that have structured world orders for close to 500 years.

Many of these leaders conceive of their societies and/or states as defined by civilization and its reach into akin Diaspora communities rather than by legally recognized borders, population within those borders, and language.

Civilisationalism has allowed China to extend its reach in the South China Sea beyond internationally recognized borders at the expense of other littoral states as well as to Diaspora communities across the globe.

It also provided the basis on which China has so far successfully imposed its views on others whether its acceptance of its one-China policy or silence, if not acquiescence, in repression in Xinjiang.

Civilisationalism has further enabled Russia to recognize breakaway states in Georgia, annex Crimea, and spark violent conflict in eastern Ukraine.

In some ways, the nation state, designed to put an end to religious wars in Europe, paved the way for a revival of civilisationalism by godfathering exclusionary politics that were based on a determination of who belonged and who did not belong to a nation, a question which civilisationalism answers by legitimizing supremacism, racism and prejudice.

From the outset, newly conceived European nation states sought to build nations by not fully embracing those it believed were not truly part of their nation.

The nation state’s exclusivity, rather than as a result of the Westphalia treaty pulling the curtain on an era of European wars, sparked another round of armed conflict intended to fortify newly found national identities.

Today, reconceptualization of the nation state and the notion of sovereignty has become an imperative with civilisationalism adopting exclusivity as its battle cry and the nation state’s centuries-long inability and unwillingness to negotiate mutually workable arrangements that take account of aspirations and identities of societal groups that feel excluded.

Reconceptualization would need to be geared towards guaranteeing individual and minority rights based on an international legal framework that is enforceable.

Failure to do so would likely usher in an era of disruptive societal tension, marginalization and disenfranchisement of minorities, flows of mass migration, radicalization and increased political violence.

A recent International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) report concluded that China was advising countries confronting political and economic instability, sometimes sparked in part by Chinese project-related corruption, to adopt its model of brutally cracking down on any expression of dissent like in Xinjiang.

China, according to the report, is also advocating implementation of its system of social control, involving the use of invasive Chinese artificial intelligence-based surveillance technology, reducing media to parrots of government policy, and firewalling the Internet. China is further training governments in ways of disrupting opposition activity.

China’s view of economic development as a way of countering what it sees as cultural drivers of extremism underlies its effort to Sinicize Turkic Muslim Islam in Xinjiang and is implicit in Chinese aid to countries in the Middle East.

Mr. Xi announced in July of last year US$20billion in loans to Middle Eastern nations as well as US$106 million in financial aid for Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen on the back of Chinese assertions that finance would help resolve the region’s political, religious and cultural tensions.

“China is increasingly proactive in its response to instability in developing countries. It is now more forthright in its advice to partner countries and is proactive in promoting Chinese solutions to other countries’ problems,” said Nicholas Crawford, the IISS report’s author.

China’s policy prescriptions, elements of which are being adopted across the globe, is likely to perpetuate problems inherent to exclusivism propagated by both civilisationalists and nation states that are more concerned about perceived threats to their territorial integrity or constructed collective identities than aspirations of groups that are part of their societal fabric.

The rise of civilisationalists, autocrats, authoritarians and illiberals, including Mr. Xi, does not bode well for Eurasia, a region pockmarked by groups whose rights have been repeatedly violated by various civilizationalist leaders as well as exclusionary nation states concerned about challenges to their territorial integrity or constructed collective identities.

“Geopolitics is no longer simply about the economy or security… The non-Western world, led by Beijing and Moscow, is pushing back against the Western claim to embody universal values… The rejection of Western universalism by the elites in Russia and China challenges the idea of the nation state as the international norm for political organisation… The new pivot of geopolitics is civilisation,” said political scientist Adrian Pabst.

A tour of the world’s flashpoints proves the point.

The flashpoints include predominantly Kurdish south-eastern Turkey, what is left of the Kurdish enclave in northern Syria, Rohingya rotting away in Bangladeshi refugee camps after fleeing ethnic cleansing in Myanmar; the plight of Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang and Catalan efforts to democratically decide whether they want to remain part of Spain.

They illustrate the fact that the failure of the nation state to build truly inclusive and cohesive societies coupled with the rise of the civilizational state and civilizationalist leaders portends a new world order that is likely to be characterized by individual and collective rights abuse that heightens societal tensions and aggravates disputes and conflicts.

“The global order provides more mechanisms for states to deal diplomatically with each other than with the people inside them,” noted scholar and author Malka Older.

The civilizationalist threat to individual and minority rights is enhanced by its insistence on collective adherence to an overriding ideology whether that is the Chinese communist party’s concept of absolute control of anything and everything cloaked in ultra-nationalism and concepts of unique Chinese characteristics; Russian Orthodoxy cemented in the alliance between church and state; or Victor Orban’s conceptualization of a Hungarian nation that is homogenously white and Christian.

In a recent study of religion and tolerance in the Middle East, widely viewed as perhaps the religiously most intolerant part of the world, political scientist Michael Hoffman concluded that it is not religion that in and of itself breeds intolerance and prejudice.

Instead, Mr. Hoffman suggested that Muslim attitudes towards the other differ sharply between believers who pray collectively in a mosque and those who worship in private.

Private prayer “does not contain the same sectarian content as communal prayer,” Mr. Hoffman noted, implicitly pointing a finger at autocratic authorities who in the Middle East often exercise tight control of what is said in the mosque.

“The group identification mechanism is not present for private prayer; since private prayer is fundamentally an personal phenomenon, it does not cause believers to distinguish more sharply between their own sect and others and therefore does not produce the intolerant outcomes associated with communal worship,” Mr. Hoffman went on to say.

Mr. Hoffman’s research, despite its focus on the Middle East, spotlighted in an era of rising civilisationalism the risks to universal basic human dignity as well as individual and minorities rights in directly or indirectly imposing collectivist beliefs that drown out the political, ethnic or religious other.

The silver lining in what are bleak prospects may be Mr. Pabst’s conclusion that “neither the Western cult of private freedom without social solidarity nor the totalitarian tendencies among China’s and Russia’s elites can nurture resilient societies against the disruptive forces of technology and implacable economic globalisation… (Yet) across different civilisations there is an inchoate sense that the purpose of politics is the free association of people around common interests and shared social virtues of generosity, loyalty, courage, sacrifice and gratitude. The practice of such virtues can bind us together as citizens, nations and cultures beyond colour, class or creed.”

Dr. James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at Nanyang Technological University’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, an adjunct senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute and co-director of the University of Wuerzburg’s Institute of Fan Culture

#china #China (PRC)#Russia #europe #Eurasia #civilization #racism #supremacism

0 notes

bluewatsons · 5 years

Text

Leigh E. Rich, “Born Like This / Into This”: Tuberculosis, Justice, and Futuristic Dinosaurs, 13 J Bioethical Inquiry 1 (2016)

I was born of disease.

Not in the same circumstances as too many still today and so many others in the past, but my existence—or at least key narratives from life courses entwined with my existence—are rooted in disease. Had it not been for the “Spanish flu,” I would cease to exist. For it was the death of my paternal grandfather’s first wife during the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic that left him a widower, with three young children to raise. Out of this tragedy came marriage to my grandmother and ten more children, my father eighth in that line, eleventh in the blended family overall.1 And had it not been for tuberculosis, my grandparents never would have met. For it was my great-grandfather’s affliction with TB that brought this small immigrant family of three—him, my great-grandmother, and my barely born grandmother—from New York to Denver. They came West, into the dry, thin High Plains air of Colorado, where the sun reputedly shines three-quarters of the year (Colorado Climate Center 2010) and the climate was a prescriptive for what was then called “consumption” and those ill with it “lungers” (Lewis 2015).

Perhaps this health history somehow found its way, Lamarckian-style, into my being. For I am otherwise not sure from where my lifelong interest in medicine and the health sciences springs. I didn’t grow up in a household of healthcare workers. My parents, before I knew them, were both schoolteachers, and all of my life they owned and operated a local furniture manufacturing company.2 There were no aunts or uncles as doctors or nurses, no family friends in the business of sickness and health or the production of well-being. Yet, since I was small, all I wanted to do was read about medicine. True, these early books consisted mostly of those by Michael Crichton and Robin Cook (which also might explain my ongoing interest in the rise and persistence of the detective narrative). And while these novels weren’t the bastions of great philosophical or medical depth (although authored by scientists/modern medicine men), they hooked me into seeking more, and soon I was reading non-fiction about the rise of hospitals, evolutionary theory, the pharmaceutical industry, the history of science and technology. Anything related to medicine. And the politics of health. And morbidity and mortality.

Towards the end of high school, I enrolled in science seminar as well as a medical careers class, where we met after school with a dedicated teacher who led discussions and arranged field trips to hospitals and the University of Colorado’s Health Sciences Center. At the age of sixteen, a classmate and I even observed several surgeries from the floor of an operating room. Practically from over his shoulder, we watched as the orthopaedic surgeon and his team talked us through each procedure, working as one, serious and collegial, clearly enjoying their work while caring for their patients. Nearly thirty years later, I remember this experience vividly, gratefully, aware then as now of the opportunities that being able to attend a well-funded school provides. Through science seminar, I was offered an internship at National Jewish Medical and Research Center (now called National Jewish Health), whose doors opened in 1899 as National Jewish Hospital for Treatment of Consumptives. Under the guidance of world-renowned pulmonologists, I learned about TB, Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare (MAI), and drug resistance and participated in research exploring drug-susceptibility testing.

I gave no thought to it at the time, but, for a brief moment anyway, I was part of an institution that once treated my great-grandfather, connecting me to him in ways beyond just our genes.

But it’s not only our own families who count. It’s all families. As I now write, reflecting on TB and these odd (and rather morbid) webs of social and historical ties, memories are dredged from my primary school days as well, when our forearms would be pricked with the tuberculin tine test, the area circled in pen, and we’d be handed index-sized cards with variations of raised bumps with which to compare our own possible reactions over the next several days. I remember these cards well. I was intrigued by them. Almost mesmerized. And I would spend considerable time running my fingers over the uneven, artificial bulges, not so much out of vigilance for potential parallels between card and arm, but curiosity. Curiosity for something that was rather alien.

For me, there was a disconnect with the card, even though TB had in some ways shaped my life.

That disconnect doesn’t exist, cannot exist, for many, even today. According to the World Health Organization, in 2014 “9.6 million people fell ill with TB and 1.5 million people died from the disease” (WHO 2015b, ¶2 under “Key facts”; see also WHO 2015a, 8). Moreover, “an estimated 480,000 people developed multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB)” (WHO 2015b, ¶6 under “Key facts), nearly a tenth of whom have extensively drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) (WHO 2015a, 2). By 2015, XDR-TB “had been reported by 105 countries” (WHO 2015a, 2).

Although TB occurs in every region in the world, some shoulder heavier burdens. The World Health Organization reports:

In 2014, about 80% of reported TB cases occurred in 22 countries. The 6 countries that stand out as having the largest number of incident cases in 2014 were India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, People’s Republic of China and South Africa. Some countries are experiencing a major decline in cases, while in others the numbers are dropping very slowly (WHO 2015b, ¶2 under “Global impact of TB”).

Thus, while great strides have been made in reducing the overall death rate from TB and saving lives, concerns remain. As Mario Raviglione, director of the Global TB Programme, writes in the preface to the 2015 Global Tuberculosis Report, TB is “a classic example of a disease of poverty” (WHO 2015a, x). It was born in poverty and is sustained by poverty (see, e.g., Snewin, Cooper, and Hannan 2002). For example, the WHO reports that “[g]lobally an estimated 3.3% of new TB cases and 20% of previously treated cases have MDR-TB, a level that has changed little in recent years” (WHO 2015a, 2). And a “primary cause of MDR-TB,” the WHO states elsewhere, “is inappropriate treatment. Inappropriate or incorrect use of anti-TB drugs, or use of poor quality medicines, can cause drug resistance” (WHO 2015b, ¶3 under “Multidrug-resistant TB”).

Drug resistance, therefore, is “a human-made phenomenon” (Selgelid and Reichman 2011, S9), a combination of lack of access to medicines for many who need them, adherence issues among patients (e.g., rationing for economic reasons, discontinuation due to side effects), diagnostic and clinical errors, stigmatization, and continuing disincentives for change in health systems, politics, and industry.

But if it is “a human-made phenomenon,” then, too, are the solutions.

The question remains, however, whether such solutions are possible within our current social contracts. In what has become a rather controversial op-ed piece, Peter Buffett, son of American entrepreneur and philanthropist Warren Buffett, wrote frankly in 2013 about what he and his wife have termed “Philanthropic Colonialism”—which not only involves attempts to “save the day” and solve local problems in other cultures with “very little knowledge of a particular place” (and sometimes succeeding only in creating “unintended consequences”) but also “conscience laundering,” or giving back in fractional ways in order to appease any moral distress sparked by a system that “creates vast amounts of wealth for the few” at the expense of all (Buffett 2013, ¶2, ¶3, and ¶7).3

Focusing on charity, then, “just keeps the existing structure of inequality in place,” and Buffett instead calls for “a new operating system,” one steeped in humanism (Buffett 2013, ¶8 and ¶13). The title to his piece, “The Charitable–Industrial Complex,” references U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s warning upon leaving office in 1961 to beware of a growing military–industrial complex, the intertwined and reinforcing relationships “between corporations and the armed forces” that seek to maximize their own interests regardless of any peril to democracy (Bacevich 2011, ¶1). History and international relations professor Andrew J. Bacevich, in examining several of Eisenhower’s speeches related to the “economic, social, political, and moral” implications of “misappropriate[ing] … scarce resources” and diverting “social capital from productive to destructive purposes” (Bacevich 2011, ¶5–¶7), concludes that “the president contemplated a world permanently perched on the brink of war—‘humanity hanging from a cross of iron’—and he appealed to Americans to assess the consequences likely to ensue” (Bacevich 2011, ¶4).

This “cross of iron” smacks of Thomas Hobbes’ state of war, which, while “perfect freedom,” can only be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (1886, 64).

So too, perhaps, with the charitable–industrial complex, although Buffett’s editorial looks to John Rawls instead of Hobbes, asking us (in so many words) to return to an “original position,” to go behind a “veil of ignorance,” and to build “from the ground up” a “[n]ew code” (Buffett 2013, ¶13)—one that maximizes the minimum and secures not only basic equal liberties for all but also “effective freedom,” where genuine access to resources is a reality that enables individuals and communities to develop and grow and pursue their educational, entrepreneurial, and other dreams (Rawls 2003). We must also, then, take cues not merely from Rawls but Charles W. Mills (1997), whose examination of The Racial Contract requires that we acknowledge—and dismantle—the malign normative system within social contract theory that has been blind to the historical and enduring “whiteness” of liberalism, to the embedded biases rooted in colonialism about who “counts” as equal, free, rational persons (Mills 1997). Instead, we must create genuinely inclusive social contracts.

“What we have is a crisis of imagination,” Buffett urges. “Albert Einstein said that you cannot solve a problem with the same mind-set that created it” (Buffett 2013, ¶14), and thus we cannot address the global issue of TB (and so many other diseases) without addressing the underlying socioeconomic system in which it thrives. Without addressing the poverty that created it and the poverty created from it.

TB is not something alien, not a disease of an “other.” It is my disease. It is our disease. This issue of the Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, with a symposium on tuberculosis edited by Paul H. Mason and Chris Degeling and in honour of World TB Day 2016, underscores this. It examines the intersections of narratives of TB from multiple disciplines and diverse perspectives. It emphasizes the “deeply personal story” that is TB, even as the global disease burden and efforts at eradication continue to seem daunting (Mason and Degeling 2016, under “Abstract”).4

So many years ago, when I unconsciously played with the card that accompanied the tuberculin skin test, I was asking the question of “Why me?” Not in the usual way we pose this query, when we are stricken with illness and want to know from our maker, from society, from those in our lives why we find ourselves diagnosed with a given disease at a particular time. Rather, unbeknownst to me, I was asking “Why me?” in the sense of “Why am I not vulnerable?”

It is a question that must be asked more.

And one that demands response.

We have the duty—just perhaps not yet the Kantian good will—to do more than merely “keep the pot from boiling over” (Buffett 2013, ¶8), to do more than merely perpetuate a system where, as Rawls would put it, the “inequalities … are not to the benefit of all” (Rawls 2003, 54). George Merck reputedly once said that if his pharmaceutical company “discovered a cure for cancer, he’d not patent it. … How can you keep it away from people? How can you charge a lot of money? What’s the excuse? You can’t do that” (recounted by chemist Max Tishler, cited in Werth 1994, 127).

What is our excuse?

In various permutations, we are all born of disease. Even Rawls’ A Theory of Justice was born of disease.5

We are, as poet Charles Bukowski phrased it, “born like this / into this”6:

we are

born like this

into this

into these carefully mad wars

into the sight of broken factory windows of emptiness

into bars where people no longer speak to each other

into fist fights that end as shootings and knifings

born into this

into hospitals which are so expensive that it’s cheaper to die

into lawyers who charge so much it’s cheaper to plead guilty

into a country where the jails are full and the madhouses closed

into a place where the masses elevate fools into rich heroes

“Dinosauria, we,” Bukowski deems us, and should we wilfully fail to heed this forecast, soon we may just be

the last few survivors … overtaken by new and hideous diseases … and there will be the most beautiful silence never heard born out of that.

Can we prove him wrong?

Will we?

Footnotes

I once recounted this story at a Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE) training on crisis and emergency risk communication, during a session in which we used the possibility of an avian flu pandemic as a case study. To emphasize the far-reaching effects of epidemics, the instructor asked us to consider the influenza pandemic of 1918–1919 and urged us to share how events from ninety years prior had personally affected us. She was, perhaps, at first taken aback that, in this tragic way, I had disease to thank for my father’s life and, thus, my own. It is this randomness of circumstance, being “born into this,” that political philosopher John Rawls attempted to address in his A Theory of Justice, first published in 1971.

That said, my parents always believed, and continue to do so, in education. At university, my father focused on psychology, my mother on learning disabilities. Both went on to earn master’s degrees. And today, when we meet up on Sunday mornings for our weekly walk around a local lake, we speak primarily of health—in the World Health Organization sense of the word (WHO 1946)—and social justice, trying to understand, and find ways to ameliorate, the lack of will we humans can exhibit when it comes to others’ suffering.

I thank Susan Arshack, grants director at Armstrong State University, for sharing her perspectives and Buffett’s article with me during a recent grant-writing workshop.

The issue also includes several responses to a TB-related “In That Case” column. The case study and four of the replies can be located via the JBI website at http://bioethicalinquiry.com/.

In Thomas Pogge’s biography of John “Jack” Rawls, he notes that the “most important events in Jack’s childhood were the loss of two younger brothers, who died of diseases contracted from Jack”—one from diphtheria, one from pneumonia (Pogge 2007, 5). Pogge also emphasizes that Rawls’ “sense of justice” was heavily influenced by “his mother’s work for the rights of women” and “his own reflections on race and class” in his hometown of Baltimore, Maryland (Pogge 2007, 6). Likewise, I, too, must thank my mother, who, through her ceaseless philanthropic work—while working full-time, co-raising children and now grandchildren, and caring for parents and other friends and relatives—has always been and continues to be a role model for me. Still working full-time, she recently co-founded a community garden that has, with collaborative partners, helped to create free, healthy meals for thousands of local schoolchildren. I also am shaped by and often share with my students my father’s mantra: that no one should be hungry, homeless, or without healthcare.

This and the following Bukowski lines are from the poem “Dinosauria, we” (see Bukowski 2002, 319–321).

References

Bacevich, A.J. 2011. The tyranny of Defense Inc. Atlantic Monthly, January/February. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/01/the-tyranny-of-defense-inc/308342/.

Buffett, P. 2013. The charitable–industrial complex. The New York Times, July 26. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/27/opinion/the-charitable-industrial-complex.html.

Bukowski, C. 2002. The last night of the earth poems. New York: Ecco/HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Colorado Climate Center. 2010. For fun: Questions & answers. http://climate.colostate.edu/questions.php. Accessed February 17, 2016.

Hobbes, T. 1886. Leviathan, or the matter, form and power of a commonwealth, ecclesiastical and civil, 2nd ed. Edited by C.B. MacPherson. London: George Routledge and Sons.Google Scholar

Lewis, S. 2015. How tuberculosis fueled Colorado’s growth. Colorado Public Radio, February 10. http://www.cpr.org/news/story/how-tuberculosis-fueled-colorados-growth.

Mason, P.H., and C. Degeling. 2016. Beyond biomedicine: Relationships and care in tuberculosis prevention. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 13(1). doi: 10.1007/s11673-015-9697-6.

Mills, C.W. 1997. The racial contract. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Pogge, P. 2007. John Rawls: His life and theory of justice. Translated by M. Kosch. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Rawls, J. 2003. A theory of justice, revised ed. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press.Google Scholar

Selgelid, M.J., and L.B. Reichman. 2011. Ethical issues in tuberculosis diagnosis and treatment. The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease 15(Suppl 2): S9–S13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Snewin, V.A., H.N. Cooper, and M.M. Hannan. 2002. Mycobacterium tuberculosis. In Molecular medical microbiology, vol. 1, edited by M. Sussman, 1731–1748. London and San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Werth, B. 1994. The billion-dollar molecule: The quest for the perfect drug. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

World Health Organization (WHO). 1946. Constitution of the World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf. Accessed February 17, 2016.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2015a. Global tuberculosis report 2015. Geneva: WHO Press, publication no. WHO/HTM/TB/2015.22. http://www.who.int/tb/publications/global_report/en/.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2015b. Tuberculosis: Fact sheet n° 104. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs104/en/. Accessed February 17, 2016.

#narrative #autobiography #disease and society #culture #The Past #personal history #public health #tuberculosis #john rawls #charles w. mills #justice #fairness #duty #humanism #memory #medicine and society #disease and culture #the way we lived then

0 notes

lmdesignincontext · 5 years

Text

Media Semiotics Chapter 1- signs and myths

The Semiotic point of view

Groundbreaking view of language- a major contribution to the discipline of linguistics.

Both semiology and semiotics get their names from the greek work ‘semion’, which translates to ‘sign’. Semiotics refers to the study of how visual signs can communicate meanings. Language is made up of signs (such as words), other signs, such as visual signs, can be analysed using the same methods, of looking into what signs actually mean.

SEMIOTICS OR SEMIOLOGY IS THE STUDY OF SIGNS IN SOCIETY.

Semiotic analysis can be of language, but much of the analysis is concerned with non linguistic things, such as photographs.

Anything in society can be a sign, whether that is a visual sign, an auditory sign or a linguistic sign. Signs have differing meanings, some of which are traditional and are deep rooted in society, whereas other signs have evolved throughout history, thus taking on a different meaning over time.

Consciousness and experience are built out of language

Signs and language circulate round society and the people in society take them up and utilise them. Different societies and cultures have different connotations of what signs mean. Semiotics can change over time, which means that people have a unique idea of what a specific sign means, depending on their culture and belief.

The capacity of linguistic signs to be meaningful depends on their existence in a social context, and on their conventionally accepted use in that social context.

Every society and culture has a social context and linguistic signs can vary based on this. For example ‘cat’ in the English language means a fury four legged animal, however the French translation is ‘chat’, something that in the English language differs from the original word ‘cat’.

Semioticians search for the systems which underlie the ability of signs like words, images, items of clothing, food, cars, or whatever to carry certain meanings in society.

Everything in society carries a meaning and visual signs, such as clothing can communicate messages about one’s self without using the spoken language. ‘Codes give social meaning to our choices’. For instance, a man may select jogging shorts and training shoes to attend the local gym. These items of clothing communicate an informal dress code, contrary to a suit and dress shoes, which communicate a formal message, or even have assumptions of luxury and high class.

Codes in society, specifically traditional dress codes, have divided the genders, for instance men traditionally wear suits and women will traditionally wear skirts and dresses. In the 21stcentury these stereotypes are not strictly adhered to anymore as more people are inclined to bend social norms. In current times, clothes do not necessarily communicate specific signs anymore, due to the changing social demographic and gender equality movements.

There are linguistic codes which divide language up just as clothes are divided up into a coded set of signs.

There are linguistic codes that are appropriate when talking to babies and children, these codes are vastly different to if one was talking to royalty. Informal and formal linguistic codes can be applied to different situations. An informal linguistic code would be used if one was writing a love poem and the language would be very different to someone writing a job application, in which the language would be far more sophisticated and formal.

Individual signs become meaningful because of their difference from all other signs.

Individuals in society may express their personality using visual signs, for example, if an individual chose to wear black and identify differently to others, it could give the impression that they are into alternative culture. In this day and age, different social groups may choose to express themselves in different ways, this can lead to other individuals in society making assumptions based on the visual cues of an individual or a group of people. In a western society, the alternative culture is widely accepted, as well as other visual cues that may insinuate that one may have different interests to the norm. However in developing world cultures, one may find it harder to express themselves over fear of judgement or violence.

Synchronic analysis reveals more about the contemporary meaning of jeans. For instance, denim jeans used to be work clothes, and were clothing signs in a code for manual labour. Today jeans are a sign whose meaning is ‘casual style’ or ‘youthfulness’.

This is a good example of synchronic analysis. Synchronic analysis is analysing how a visual sign has changed its social meaning over time. For instance, with the jeans, they used to be associated with the working man or woman and were traditional manual labour clothes. This meaning is now no longer associated with denim jeans, as they are now seen as a fashion item, which is casual and youthful, a stark difference to their original purpose and meaning.

The sign has the ‘Signifier’ and the ‘signified’. Meaning is only generated by the relationships between signifiers, and the signified is shaped by the signifier (not the other way around). The signified or concepts in our minds that are shaped by the signifiers that our language provides to think and talk with.

Signifier is the concept, for example, the colour red. The signified is the specific within the concept, such as scarlet and crimson, which are both shades of red, but red is not specific and the colours scarlet and crimson are generated from the initial colour red.

Gestures, dress codes, traffic signs, advertising, images, newspapers, television programmes and so on are all kinds of media which use visual signs.

Visual signs are everywhere, the visual is key in communicating the message, as a different visual cue can project something different. This is vital if there is no linguistic cue in the sense that the visual sign needs to be specific and recognisable. Visual signs can have different connotations, depending on the environment in which they are used. In the instance of colours, red is often associated with heat and danger, due to its very eye catching qualities (this is also why shop sale signs are red, it is an aggressive colour). The aggressive tone of the colour red can be beneficial when highlighting the key points in a sign, however, it could be inappropriate if used too frequently.

Indexical signs have a concrete and often casual relationship to their signified.

Smoke is an index of fire. A sign caused by the thing in which it signifies. Symbolic components are connotations that have been linked to the sign, for example, the colour red has connotations of danger and prohibition. An indexical sign in the sense that it is pointing to a traffic situation, indicating that cars must wait. In different contexts signs can have different indexical meanings.

Myth does not refer to mythology in the usual sense of traditional stories, but ways of thinking about people, products, places or ideas which are structured to send particular messages to readers or viewers.

Marketing brands often use high profile people to endorse or market their products, the consumer will associate that product with luxury or high class, depending on the method of marketing. An example of this is in the world of fragrance, Elizabeth Arden produces fragrance but markets it using Britney Spears to endorse the fragrances. This is a clear marketing technique to draw in the audience of Britney Spears, which is primarily young females, to make them want to purchase the fragrance.

Myth is not an innocent language, but one that picks up existing signs and their connotations and orders them purposefully to play a particular social role.

Using traditions and deep set connotations that have been associated with these traditions, companies will market their adverts to exploit these signs and connotations in order to sell maximum units of products.

Bignell, J. (1997) Media Semiotics. Manchester University Press

0 notes

theconservativebrief · 6 years

Link

President Trump implied that his justification for separating families seeking asylum, and his restrictionist ideology for even legal immigrants, is to prevent the United States from enduring what’s happening in Europe, where, he claims falsely, immigrants are bringing with them a wave of violence that’s driving up the crime rate.

Trump has often referred to these kind of outlandish claims as just “politically incorrect.” But that isn’t really it. Trump — and key members of his administration — are embracing what used to be a fringe theory held by the furthest of the far right.

Believers argue that white people are being systematically “erased” by their inferiors, and thus require an influx of white babies and new white immigrants (and the exclusion of nonwhite immigrants) to survive.

To some among these believers, white Americans, and white culture, are threatened by a slow-running “genocide” via demographic replacement. (Indeed, Trump once retweeted someone with the handle “WhiteGenocide,” which refers to this theory.)

We don’t want what is happening with immigration in Europe to happen with us!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2018

Stephen Miller, in an interview this week:

“It was a simple decision by the administration to have a zero tolerance policy for illegal entry, period. The message is that no one is exempt from immigration law.” https://t.co/2c1crARYqg

— Jonathan Lemire (@JonLemire) June 17, 2018

This theory has adherents on the alt-right, across the conservative media, and even in Congress.

Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies. https://t.co/4nxLipafWO

— Steve King (@SteveKingIA) March 12, 2017

In this worldview, it’s not “racist” to think that a Norwegian might be a better fit with American culture (as they define it) than an immigrant arriving from Lagos or Addis Ababa — it’s “racial realism.” It’s the only way to stop white people from being losers of a fight to the death between races.

These ideas are old, rooted in scientific racism and fears of miscegenation once held by Progressive Era stalwarts like President Woodrow Wilson and white supremacist hate groups alike. But now they appear to have the ear of those closest to the president — and are playing a part in the creation of policy.

This group included former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon. In fact, long before he ran Trump’s presidential campaign or took a role in the White House, Bannon believed that the movements of nonwhite immigrant groups, legal or not, posed a physical, cultural, political, and moral danger to “white” countries. As he told White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller in a March 2016 Sirius XM show, “When you look and there’s got 61 million, 20 percent of the country, is immigrants — is that not a massive problem?” Miller agreed wholeheartedly. Now Miller and his former boss, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, are vocalizing the same views, both to the media and to the president of the United States.

AG Jeff Sessions on immigration reform: “What good does it do to bring in somebody who’s illiterate in their own country, has no skills, & is going to struggle in our country & not be successful? That is not what a good nation should do, and we need to get away from it.” pic.twitter.com/JwOBmbAG0P

— Fox News (@FoxNews) January 17, 2018

Trump’s internal racism might be that of a 71-year-old white man who marvels that, for instance, members of the Congressional Black Caucus didn’t already know Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson. But his external racism is heavily influenced by adherents of an ideology that believes whiteness is the essential character of America, with direct and very detrimental impacts on discussions regarding immigration policy.

And importantly, Trump’s language and policies are evidence of a worldview that holds that whiteness is more valuable to participation in the American experiment than anything else — even a deep and abiding belief in American ideals.

Throughout the 19th century, fears regarding miscegenation and “race mixing,” rooted in a belief that the dilution of white bloodlines — bloodlines that offered political, economic, and social authority over nonwhites — would result in societal disaster led to states across the country banning interracial marriages and enforcing strict rules regarding exactly what it meant to be white. In the 20th century, such views were espoused by Progressive Era activists, leading to restrictionist acts passed in 1917 and 1924. As Madison Grant argued in the 1915 eugenicist tome The Passing of the Great Race:

The resurgence of inferior races and classes throughout not merely Europe but the world, is evident in every despatch from Egypt, Ireland, Poland, Romania, India and Mexico. … Neither the black, nor the brown, nor the yellow, nor the red will conquer the white in battle. But if the valuable elements in the Nordic race mix with in-ferior strains or die out through race suicide, then the citadel of civilization will fall for mere lack of defenders.

More recently, the exact language of “white genocide” began to circulate among the white supremacist underground after the Second World War. In 1972, the official newspaper of the National Socialist White People’s Party published a piece titled “Over-Population Myth Is Cover for White Genocide,” arguing that the widespread availability of contraception would lead to a terrifying future in which “whites will be outnumbered four to one.”

A decade later, David Lane, a white supremacist responsible for the murder of a Jewish radio host in 1984, wrote the “White Genocide Manifesto” while in prison, arguing that “‘racial integration’ is only a euphemism for genocide.” He later shortened his three-page manifesto to 14 words: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” Three decades later, the term “white genocide” is the single most popular hashtag used by white nationalists on Twitter.

The sentiment among white nationalists has little changed since the Civil War: Whiteness is a valuable commodity, essential to the very nature of American and European life. And it is under attack — not by violence but by immigration, and by sexual intercourse between whites and nonwhites.

“White genocide” rhetoric circulated in mail-order publications and racist websites like Stormfront for much of the 1990s and 2000s, but also held sway within policy institutes and foundations that gave cover to scientific racism, also known as “racial realism” — a belief that racism is not only based in fact but has scientific and quantitative backing.

Among these groups was the Pioneer Fund — which the Washington Post found in 1985 to have “financed research into “racial betterment” by “scientists seeking to prove that blacks are genetically inferior to whites.” American Renaissance, a publication of the self-described “race-realist, white advocacy organization” New Century Foundation, held an online symposium in late 2017 called “Global Demographics and White Survival: What Is to Be Done?”

One writer included in the conference, F. Roger Devlin, compared African birthrates to that of the deer population in Arizona, arguing, “We cannot ‘cull’ Africans as if they were deer, but we can eliminate the misguided humanitarian aid that is doing so much harm.” He concluded his essay with the following:

Obviously, we must be prepared to do what is necessary to defend our own living space, up to and including shooting intruders. Whites are so used to seeing Africans as objects of humanitarian concern that many are unable to grasp that they may also be dangerous rivals. But in fact, fertility is a major advantage they possess over us. We should not attempt to compete with them directly, but we can and must prevent our living space from becoming a dumping ground for their excess fertility. If we fail, it will mean a darker future for all humanity.

Another white supremacy foundation is the National Policy Institute, created by William Regnery in 2005 to “give voice to the interests of white peoples.” Its current president is Richard Spencer, who has said he worked closely with Stephen Miller in college on campus activism about immigration.

It must be noted that these ideas are not only untrue but also ahistorical. The idea of whiteness as quantifiable and, moreover, essential to the notion of what it means to be an American ignores virtually all of American history.

In fact, hard lines dividing Americans by race were redrawn over and over; many American families seemed to cross from black to white to black depending on their social status and the region of the country in which they lived. Immigrant groups, too, endured changing racial norms, with Irish and Italian Americans, for example, deemed scientifically inferior for decades.

When Maine politician Ira Hersey declared in the early 20th century, “We have thrown open wide our gates and through them have come other alien races, of alien blood, from Asia and southern Europe … with their strange and pagan rites, their babble of tongues,” he was talking about Italian Catholics.

White Americans are declining as a percentage of the population of the United States, from roughly 69 percent of the population in 2000 to 64 percent in 2010. As of July 1, 2015, just over half of all babies under the age of 1 born in the United States were racial and ethnic minorities. Mixed-race Americans are the second-fastest-growing ethnic group in America.

Time magazine, “The New Face of America,” November 18, 1993.

For many Americans, this is a positive development. But for “racial realists,” this is an emergency.

As they see it, if there are more nonwhite people in America, there will be fewer white people. If there are fewer white people, there will be fewer white voters who would favor conservative policies. As “racial realist” Gregory Hood wrote for American Renaissance in November 2017, “American civic nationalism ultimately depends on white voters. The refusal to speak the truth explicitly about demographic realities [dooms] the GOP to electoral extinction.”

The underlying assumption is that only white people will favor conservative policies. As Hood wrote in the same piece, conservatives must understand “that many of the things they value — the flag, monuments to certain leaders, or cultural norms such as a tradition of free speech — really are dependent on a European-American majority.”

That’s an echo of the sentiments shared by immigration restrictionist John Tanton, who told a donor to his organization, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, “One of my prime concerns is about the decline of folks who look like you and me,” and warned a friend, “for European-American society and culture to persist requires a European-American majority, and a clear one at that.”

There’s markedly little discussion among “racial realists” of attempting to creating conservative arguments that appeal to nonwhite Americans. To them, race is political destiny, and to the racial victors will go the nation. In a way, it’s the very inverse of “demographics as destiny.”

In short, believers of “white genocide” think that any encouragement of diversity in schools or workplaces, or the increase in mixed-race Americans (and their presence in mainstream media), isn’t evidence of more progressive attitudes toward race, but of a sinister plot.

In the words of Richard Spencer: “America was … a white country, designed for ourselves and our posterity. It is our creation, it is our inheritance, and it belongs to us.”

Of course, much of the current GOP might not feel comfortable using terminology like “white genocide” and “racial realism,” in part because many conservatives simply don’t share these views.

Many members of the Republican Party think like Haitian-American Rep. Mia Love, who spoke out about Trump’s racist comments in January. In her words, Trump’s statements were “unkind, divisive, elitist, and fly in the face of our nation’s values,” and she told CNN’s Jake Tapper, “You have to understand that there are countries that struggle out there but … their people are good people and they’re part of us.”

In fact, until recently, the conventional wisdom was that the GOP needed to do more to appeal to people of color in order to survive and thrive. After the presidential election in 2012, Sen. Marco Rubio told Politico, “The conservative movement should have particular appeal to people in minority and immigrant communities who are trying to make it, and Republicans need to work harder than ever to communicate our beliefs to them.” Sen. Susan Collins agreed, telling the New York Times in 2012, “Republicans cannot win with just rural white voters.”

“One of the great projects and challenges of the conservative movement is persuading a much broader ethnic coalition of Americans of the value of conservative ideas,” said David French, a staff writer at National Review who experienced online attacks by far-right trolls in 2015, many of whom aimed their ire at French’s Ethiopian-born daughter.

But many on the right didn’t, and don’t, feel the same way. While Miller was advising then-Sen. Jeff Sessions on how best to kill the efforts of Rubio and the “Gang of Eight” to pass immigration reform in 2013, Steve Bannon and Breitbart News were fanning the flames of racial discord, complete with a “black crime” article label and stories about the imminent dangers posed by nonwhite immigrants.

It’s not just Breitbart. Conservative pundit Ann Coulter (who tweeted, “I don’t care if [Trump] wants to perform abortions in White House,” after the release of his immigration policy paper in 2015) wrote last November that “the only reason Democrats want a never-ending stream of Third World immigrants is because they know immigrants will help them win elections. … There isn’t much time on the clock before it’s lights-out for the GOP.” Trump is a noted fan of Coulter’s writing, and during his presidential campaign, Coulter warmed up the crowd at several campaign rallies.

In a way, the idea slots neatly into Trump’s zero-sum worldview. To those who voice the “white genocide” myth, a victory by nonwhite Americans, particularly immigrants, will inevitably lead to losses by white Americans.

As far-right commentator (and former White House senior adviser) Pat Buchanan wrote, “Endless mass migration here means the demographic death of the GOP. In U.S. presidential elections, persons of color whose roots are in Asia, Africa and Latin America vote 4-1 Democratic, and against the candidates favored by American’s vanishing white majority.”

To him, this puts America “on the path to national suicide.” American Renaissance shared his column.

Bannon may be out of the White House (and Breitbart News). But his attitudes regarding immigration and immigrants remain in place, voiced by fellow immigration restrictionists like Sessions and Miller who believe that immigration poses a danger to American culture and American life — unless that immigration is from a predominantly white country.

Most importantly, those views are being voiced by Trump himself. After all, when the white nationalist marchers in Charlottesville, Virginia, chanted, “You will not replace us” — a direct reference to the “white genocide” myth — Trump made sure to say that there were “very fine people” among those chanting.

This has a direct impact on immigration policy, including current negotiations regarding family separation at the Mexican border with the United States.

It’s making the process of dealmaking virtually impossible for Democrats, and for Republicans who desperately want to avoid any arguments that racialize immigration policy. If the debate over immigration is about border security and preventing the entrance of genuine threats to American security, compromise is imaginable, even possible.

But if the debate over immigration is actually about a belief that nonwhite immigrants pose an existential danger to America and Americanness as a whole, and that “demographics” require Haitian immigrants to be expelled from the country while hypothetical immigrants from Norway are welcomed with open arms, then there is no ready compromise at hand.

As my colleague Dara Lind wrote in January, “You can’t negotiate with people who believe that an America that lets in people from ‘shithole countries’ isn’t the America they know or love. Either America is a nation of immigrants or it is a nation of blood and soil. It cannot be both.”

Original Source -> The scary ideology behind Trump’s immigration instincts

via The Conservative Brief

#IFTTT #The Conservative Brief

0 notes

usnewsaggregator-blog · 7 years

Text

Editorial: Will Harvey Weinstein’s Fall Finally Reform Men?

New Post has been published on https://usnewsaggregator.com/editorial-will-harvey-weinsteins-fall-finally-reform-men/

Editorial: Will Harvey Weinstein’s Fall Finally Reform Men?

Remember Anita Hill, who told a firing line of skeptical senators the story of constant harassment by her boss, Clarence Thomas, more than 25 years ago. The lawmakers, every one of them male, seemed less concerned with the alleged misconduct of a Supreme Court nominee than that a woman would drag such a tawdry subject into the halls of Congress. While Ms. Hill’s brave testimony prompted a sharp rise in sexual-harassment claims, she was vilified in public; nearly twice as many Americans said at the time that they believed now-Justice Thomas’s account of what happened over hers.

Remember former President Bill Clinton, whose popularity endures despite a long string of allegations of sexual misconduct and, in one case, rape — all of which he has denied. Mr. Clinton did eventually admit to the affair with an intern, Monica Lewinsky, that nearly toppled his presidency, but he pointed out that it was not illegal.

Then, of course, there’s the current occupant of the Oval Office, who won the election only weeks after the public heard him brag about grabbing women’s genitalia, and who once said that if his daughter were ever sexually harassed at work, she should go find a new job. That president leads a party intent on passing laws that would re-establish gender norms and hierarchies from the middle of the last century (Defund Planned Parenthood! No abortions after six weeks!) — making it harder for women to attain the social equality and economic independence that would go a long way toward reducing sexual harassment in the workplace.

In other words, even the highest-profile opportunities to change America’s endemic culture of sexual harassment, which is overwhelmingly, though not exclusively, committed by men against women, can somehow be lost or swept away. How do we keep that from happening again?

And how do we ensure that progress filters down to average American workplaces, where sexual harassment occurs all the time but rarely gets media attention? The answer is part cultural, part economic and part legal.

The most conservative estimates say 25 percent of women have experienced sexual harassment at work, although the real number is surely much higher, since only a small fraction of such behavior is ever reported. As many as 90 percent of workers who are harassed never file a formal complaint, according to a 2016 report by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which receives more than 12,000 complaints of sex-based harassment each year.

The reasons for this silence are obvious: Women fear retaliation, indifference or disbelief if they speak up. If it’s hard for rich and famous people, so many of whom kept silent in the face of Mr. Weinstein’s well-known depredations, imagine how much harder it is for someone with no political or economic power. But the Weinstein saga also illustrates what a difference it can make when women join together — and men join with them — to confront harassers openly.

Continue reading the main story

HOW TO CHANGE THE CULTURE The key is to foster work environments where women feel safe and men feel obliged to report sexual harassment. “People need to be afraid not just of doing these things, but also of not doing anything when someone around them does it,” Sheryl Sandberg, the chief operating officer of Facebook, told The Times’s Nicholas Kristof last week. “If you know something is happening and you fail to take action, whether you are a man or a woman — especially when you are in power — you are responsible, too.”

But speaking up only goes so far if employers don’t make reporting harassment easy or the consequences for harassers swift and clear. Treating sexual harassment seriously is essential, not to protect against liability or to safeguard the bottom line, but because it’s wrong for anyone to have to endure harassment at work. (Though it sure helps when liability and the bottom line are at stake, too.)

Some of the nation’s largest companies are moving in the right direction. For example, McDonald’s, Burger King, Aramark and Walmart have signed on to a program requiring their tomato growers to adhere to a code of conduct that prohibits sexual harassment and assault of farmworkers, and provides a clear system for the growers’ 30,000 workers to file complaints. Fourteen businesses are part of the program; many more should join.

IT’S ABOUT POWER AND MONEY Sexual-harassment culture is tied directly to the economics of the workplace. Since harassment is about power, it’s no surprise that it thrives in industries where women are systematically kept out of powerful roles — and paid less for doing the same work as men. (This may help explain why sexual-harassment cases make up nearly half of all harassment complaints from the private sector, but less than 10 percent of those from employees of the federal government, where women have more opportunities to rise to positions of authority.)

Photo

Credit Francesco Ciccolella

Too often, male harassers use their economic power to silence women, as Mr. Weinstein and Mr. O’Reilly did repeatedly, offering them hefty payments in return for signing nondisclosure agreements. If employers were more responsive and harassment cases were easier to pursue in the courts, there would be fewer of these settlements, which can be good for individual women but allow the predatory behavior to continue unchecked.

One compromise could be to require businesses to report how many sexual-harassment claims they settle every year, or even how many complaints they receive. This would at least give prospective employees a chance to assess how bad the problem is at a given company, and could lead to greater public scrutiny in more extreme cases.

LEGAL BARRIERS The Supreme Court ruled in 1986 that sexual harassment violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion and other protected classes. Twelve years later, it made employers liable for supervisors’ harassment of workers. But in 2013, the court stepped backward, ruling that employers are liable only for racial or sexual harassment by a supervisor who has the power to fire a worker or prevent his or her promotion. In a 5-to-4 ruling, with only male justices in the majority, the court held that employers are not automatically liable for harassment by the larger number of supervisors who don’t have that power, even if they control all other aspects of a worker’s daily activities.

In her dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the decision ignored the realities of the modern workplace, and the “particular threatening character” of a supervisor’s power and authority, even one not vested with the power to fire. A worker who confronts a harassing supervisor risks “receiving an undesirable or unsafe work assignment or an unwanted transfer. She may be saddled with an excessive workload or with placement on a shift spanning hours disruptive of her family life.”

Continue reading the main story

Congress could and should overturn that ruling today by passing a law that reinstates the broader and more realistic definition of a supervisor. But good luck with that; Capitol Hill can’t even keep its own house in order. Representative Jackie Speier of California, who said she was sexually assaulted years ago when she was a congressional staff member, told Politico on Thursday that the compliance office tasked with handling harassment complaints is “toothless,” and said that Congress has been “a breeding ground for a hostile work environment for far too long.”

This may turn out to be the year when the tide finally turned on sexual harassment. The elements for a permanent cultural shift are certainly in place. More women have entered the work force, and the pay gap with men is closing, though not fast enough. More women than men are graduating from college; more are earning advanced degrees; and increasing numbers are managers, though the proportions of women still become thinner and thinner the higher in management you look. And, crucially, the internet and social media have opened a door to instant communication and community support that didn’t exist before, helping women feel less isolation and shame about their experiences, and more confident that speaking out will have a positive result.

In the end, though, the most lasting change will have to come from men, who are doing virtually all the sexual harassing. Boys must be raised to understand why that behavior is wrong, teenagers need to be reminded of it and grown men need to pay for it until they get the message.

Continue reading the main story

Original Article:

Click here

#editorial #finally #harvey #reform #weinstein

0 notes

parents4peace · 7 years

Text

How the Search for Significance is Exploited by Extremists

How are ordinary young people drawn into extremism? Why would someone whose future could be bright turn toward terrorism and violence?

When we look at extremist groups we often see only hatred and irrational violence. But if this is all there is to it, how are we to understand the appeal of extremism and develop ways to prevent recruitment?

In the video below, psychologist Jocelyn Belanger, (whose work is applied at the Centre for the Prevention of Radicalization leading to Violence in Montreal), discusses The Psychology of Martyrdom and sheds light on the why extremist groups are able to co-opt the normal quest for significance that every young person goes on.

youtube

Key to understanding the success of extremist groups are what Belanger refers to as the 3 N’s: need, network, and narrative.

Need – Belanger states that humans most profound motivation is the need to feel significant. Its what we crave, its what drives us to achieve great things and persist when things get tough. The need for significance is not some airy-fairy concept; it has profound psychological implications for individuals. For example we know from neuroscientific evidence that the brain correlates associated with physical pain and social pain are identical. In other words, losing significance deeply hurts, and this is why when we lose it, wed do about anything to restore it.”

Network – In times of hardship, people turn to groups in order to fulfill their need for significance. When someone joins a group, his or her identity fuses with the social identity of the group. The person comes to experience a sense of oneness with other group members and these group members progressively become like family. And when this transformation in the self occurs… people feel empowered, theres strength in numbers, the fear of death vanishes from the mind… if their network is endangered, they become willing to self-sacrifice in order to defend it.”

Narrative – … embedded in such a group theres also an ideological component, a narrative. The narrative essentially is composed of the norms and social values of ones group, and these ideas permeate the self… The narrative essentially prescribes what one needs to do in order to get significance. Those that sacrifice everything at the behest of these ideological imperatives are elevated to a legendary status, this is why theyre called heroes and martyrs.”

To sum up: “People transition from wanting significance, to joining a powerful social network to which they become fused, which leads them to adhere to sacred narratives or sacred values.

So what does this mean for extremism prevention or de-radicalization? Belanger claims that the same ingredients – the power of the 3 Ns – can also be harnessed for peace building and conciliation. In other words, the ingredients that fuel radicalization toward violence and self-sacrifice are the same as those that produce movement toward moderation.

He urges that “we need to keep investing in our youth, otherwise terrorist groups will, because they need the youth in order to carry out their gruesome agendas.”

Indeed, we must take this advice seriously if we want to build a safe and healthy society free of violent extremism.

Parents for Peace aims to help families concerned about a loved one becoming involved in extremism in addressing these 3 Ns. Family, friends and other community members can help to form a healthy social network to replace the dangerous influence of an extremist network. By working together and communicating respectfully with the individual of concern, this network can begin to uncover why the need for significance was going unfulfilled and how it became an opening for extremist recruitment. With this understanding, the personalized network can begin to guide the individual toward a healthy significance quest. Instead of buying in to a black-and-white narrative which prescribes violence against an out-group, the individual can be empowered to do the difficult work of attaining genuine knowledge about our complex world and charting a constructive course toward positive, fulfilling goals.

The post How the Search for Significance is Exploited by Extremists appeared first on Parents For Peace.

from Blog – Parents For Peace https://parents4peace.org/blog/search-significance-exploited-extremists/

#Blog – Parents For Peace

0 notes

digital-humanatees · 7 years

Text

Final Essay

Jessica Stockey

Digital Humanities

Professor Tomás Crowder-Taraborrelli

23 May 2017

Take a Look at Your Selfie

An Analysis of Social Media, Its Trends and the Nuances of Digital Identity and Expression

More and more, the rise of digital technologies, most notably the Internet, has given way to a rise in the usage of social media in the everyday lives of billions of users. Nowadays, depending on the social, political and cultural climate, it can be considered rare to find an individual not engaged in some platform of social media. Users turn to various social media sites for a variety of reasons. For some, sites may be a platform used to voice opinions, share personal details, voice political or religious views, or to speaking out on certain issues/topics. For others, that platform may take the shape of artistic expression. Many individuals may turn to social media as a platform on which to capture highlights from one’s life- to look back on, to show others or both. These sites also serve as a way to connect individuals nearby or even around the globe. Most social media profiles often reflect a mix or some combination of all of the above. Thanks to the variety of its function, social media appeals to a large range of audiences- especially to younger generations that have experienced all it has to offer, even amongst the downfalls and consequences that come with it. As time goes on, and the prevalence of social media seems to grow, there can be seen the development of certain trends, the development of digital identities and new methods of expression. This paper attempts to explore the perceived roles these developments play in the lives of certain individuals, who may be representatives of the experiences of those on a wider scale, and the nuances that arise between different digital experiences. An emphasis is placed, specifically in the framing of the interviews, on the usage of Instagram based on its prevalence as a platform and relevance to the topic.

As social media becomes more prevalent in everyday lives, there can be seen the cultivation of certain online personas and certain norms associated with this. In this day and age individuals can rise to a degree of fame solely based on the quality of their social media and where certain pre-existing celebrities can take their fame to the next level through the use of social media. This is possible because social media gives users the ability to “self-consciously construct images of themselves.” (Marwick, 2013, p. 191). Nowadays, its possible to create a kind of digital identity- an extension of oneself online and it’s even possible to find some form of success from the ability to do so well. In many ways it’s easier than ever to a reach a status of notoriety online in one’s social circle whether that circle be big or small. Social media is the platform. A smartphone, with a camera and an arsenal of editing apps, coupled with user’s creativity or ability to mimic are the tools. And the Internet gives the formula for success through online videos and articles featuring tips and tricks for becoming “Instagram Famous” or at the very least, seeing an increase in follower count. Using strategic methods, people can, “imagine a self or a life and use social media technologies to bring this self into being.” (Marwick, 2013, p. 193). Aesthetics, themes, good captions, photo quality, uniqueness, an image of authenticity, etc may all be taken into account when it comes to the crafting of one’s online/ digital identity. In many ways, this breeds a series of rules and expectations that users may feel pressured to follow. These platforms may “shape identities via the norms they push.” (Baym, 2015, p.137).

The flipside to this is that over the years, there’s evidence that as social media becomes more and more structured with the presence of specially crafted digital identities, there’s a growing need for an escape from all this. On the one hand can be seen the development of beautifully crafted, aesthetically pleasing Instagrams, VSCOs, Tumblr’s, and even Facebooks. On the other hand, there’s another side to these sites developing- the rise of Finstas (Fake Instagram’s or a more private Instagram), multiple Tumblrs for one user, personal/ even intimate Facebook posts, etc. Users appear to crave a more personal from of expression and audiences appear to value a sense of authenticity. There is both the creation of a “self that is simultaneously authentic and carefully edited.” (Marwick, 2013, p. 196). As well as the development of expression striving more towards the authentic and less concerned with the carefully edited. It seems that more and more, as there is a rise in the very public nature of social media, there’s increased demand for a more private form of expression. And yet, this is not always the case. Each individual has a different situation when it comes to social media as there is no one universal experience and in some cases, that experience is marked by a lack of usage.

This next section will be an exploration of this idea and a look at the diversities in digital experiences with a special emphasis on Instagram as the major social media platform discussed.

Interview 1

The individual interviewed is an avid user of Instagram. They have one account characterized by frequent posts and changing themes ranging from heavily edited posts adhering to a certain style or color scheme to unedited photos with simple captions and feature a mix of seemingly purely artistic photos as well as personal ones.

Question: What is your preferred platform of social media?

Answer: I would have to say Instagram. It’s definitely the one I use the most.

Q: What is it that draws you to Instagram? What do you get out of the experience?

A: It makes me feel good when people like or comment on something. Originally I never had an Instagram or any form of social media in high school or anything and I never really had the desire to have one. But then when I moved to California for college, my best friend told me, “Oh you should get an Instagram so we can stay connected. You can see what I’m doing, and I can see what you’re doing. We can stay in touch.” And that sort of thing. So I got one, and when I posted my first picture, it made me feel nice to see the likes and comments and such. It made me feel nice to see that she had seen it, that we were staying in touch. And then that sort of spiraled to wanting other people to see it. I started seeing how many likes I was getting and comparing them to how many likes other people were getting. It transitioned from wanting to stay connected to my friend to wanting to be connected to other people too. So I feel like that’s my current motivation- is trying to get connected to the world.

Q: Does social media, Instagram specifically, serve as a form of self-expression for you? If so, how so?

A: Yeah, I mean, I like talking pictures of things that I find interesting, you know? Sometimes if it’s more abstract, I know it might not get as many likes. I know that like, a picture of me may get more likes, but I have to think, who am I posting the picture for? So even though I know that a picture wont get as many likes, I’ll still post it because I view my Instagram as a documentation of my life. So I want to capture that moment, when that particular thing spoke to me so that I don’t forget it. But then the other part of me thinks about the connection between an artist and its audience. Because I feel like as an artist, you have to consider how commercially viable your work is. So I guess you just have to strike a balance between self-indulgence and selling out.

Q: Do you know what a Finsta is and do you have one?

A:Yes I do. It’s where you post all of your drunk pictures or like pictures that you may not want everyone to see or that you think are funny- like meme-worthy stuff. But no, I don’t have one.

Q: Is there a reason that you don’t have a Finsta?

A: I just think that they’re sort of dumb.

Q: What do you feel you get out of having a regular Instagram that you don’t feel the need or desire to have a Finsta- specifically as a form of self-expression?

A: Well I feel as though, if I’m not comfortable posting something on my regular Instagram, then I probably shouldn’t post it in the first place. And I enjoy just having one account, so one, I don’t have to worry about another account and how many followers that has. And two, I want to provide a full complete picture of myself and I’m able to have more variety because everything is posted there. It’s a more fleshed out portrait.

Q: Do you feel that your usage of social media has developed/ created a digital identity of who you are?

A: Definitely.

Q: Do you feel that your digital identity is separate or different from your identity offline?

A: No, they’re the same. I like to portray myself honestly, or at least I try to. Because, I mean, most of my followers know me in real life, so they’d be able to call bullshit if something was fake.

Q: Do you feel as though social media has created certain trends, norms, or expectations of how you should present yourself online or offline? If so, is that a bad thing?

A: No, I don’t think that social media itself has created certain trends. I think that those trends come from society. I think that having social media, and that communication helps those t rends spread faster and go viral. But I mean, most of these things are little things like, oh, look at the Unicorn Frapp I ordered. I don’t think it’s either good or bad, it’s just the way that society is working. In the same way that I don’t think that humans are necessarily good or bad.

In many ways, this user’s experience embodies the Marwick’s idea of a self or identity that is both authentic as well as carefully edited. ( 2013, p. 196). Though the individual feels as though they’ve developed a digital identity, they do not feel as though this identity is separate from their identity offline. In social media and digital expression, they find both a sense of identity as well as expression. The two are not mutually exclusive. But there are certain nuances when it comes to the freedom they feel in what to post and the factors that influence this decision making. They feel an obligation to be true to themselves and view Instagram as a platform to document what they felt/ what inspired them in a moment perhaps because, “our image of who we are, mentally and physically, is based on long-term remembrance of facts, emotions, and experiences; that self-image is never stable but is subject to constant remodeling because our perceptions of who we are changes.” (van Dijck, 2007, p. 3). But they also feel an obligation towards the desires of their audience and have a sense of what may be perceived well via likes or what may not be which is a factor in their decision making- in the crafting of a sort of image. All of this begs the question, can there be freedom found in the increasing. All of this begs the question, can there be freedom found in the increasingly structured nature of social media with the adherence of certain norms and expectations? This individuals experience gives way to the possibility that one can have a very controlled digital image that matches their real life.

Interview 2

The individual interviewed is an active user of Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Their accounts feature a variety of content ranging from personal, to raising awareness or speaking out on social justice to sex education. In addition to their more public accounts, they actively post on Finsta account which they update frequently with photos and captions often of a more personal and vulnerable nature.

Q: What is your preferred platform of social media?

A: For the last few years, I’ve used Twitter primarily, with Instagram a little bit. But really over the last few months, since I created a private Instagram or “Finsta” I’ve started using that much more.

Q: What is it that draws you to Instagram? What do you get out of the experience?

A: Instagram in general I really like because it’s a chance to share pictures but I also use the fact that it’s a picture to create captions. So I draw people in with the picture and use the caption as a chance to draw attention to an issue. Obviously social justice issues or as an opportunity to be vulnerable and make vulnerability more accepted.

Q: Does social media, Instagram specifically, serve as a form of self-expression for you? If so, how so?

A: With Instagram I like to try and create a pleasing theme based so in that sense, that’s something that I like about public Instagram. I try to take cool pictures and organize them by color and theme. As for Finsta, that’s almost like a daily journal. I’m completely honest on there and don’t have to worry about fitting myself into a theme or making things cute where as that’s definitely something that’s on my mind with public Instagram.

Q: Do you feel a sense of freedom that’s associated with your Finsta?

A: Definitely. Although, even with my Finsta, I have so many followers now that I’m definitely censoring myself a little bit now as opposed to when I didn’t have so many. The number of followers you have definitely impacts how restricted you feel whether it should or not. And I’ve had things screenshot and taken out of context so I make a conscious effort to not post anything that could be hurtful to me if shared with others or hurtful to other people. So even though I do feel a sense of freedom, I know that there have been consequences to what is posted.

Q: What role does your public Instagram play in your life or as a form of self-expression that you still value it and are still active on it despite restrictions you may feel?

A: I think I like it because obviously that’s my real name so people can find it. That’s a way to meet new people or connect with people. It kind of adds to my brand, I feel like there’s more ego related reasons why I like Rinsta (Real Insta) but I still try to use it for a good cause.

Q: Do you feel that your usage of social media has developed/ created a digital identity of who you are?

A: Of course. Anytime that you’re putting something out there, its an extension of the performance of identity that you’re putting out there everyday. And I do my best to be conscious of that and not create a completely different persona online, however, its inevitable.

Q: Do you feel that your digital identity is separate or different from your identity offline?

A: I try to make it as authentic to my real self as possible however I know that by nature of social media, I probably unconsciously try to paint myself in a more positive light. For example, I’ve had people construct an image of me through what they’ve seen on my social media and I sometimes worry that that’s going to negatively impact their image of me in real life.

Q: Do you feel as though social media has created certain trends, norms, or expectations of how you should present yourself online or offline? If so, is that a bad thing?

A: Yes of course. People see other people doing things and they’re inspired by that or they want to copy that. I think that it can be a bad thing especially for people who are younger or less conscious of that so it can perhaps take advantage of that. For example, the body positivity trend started with good intentions and lead to men taking advantage of that are trying to exploit women in that way. So in that way, something can be good in one sense and dangerous in another.

Q: Is there anything else you want to comment on the subject of social media, self-expression, identity, etc. ?

A: It’s interesting to think of all of the factors that go into what we choose to share and what we choose to hide or keep to ourselves. It’s not as simple as there merely being things you share with others and things you don’t. Its more complex than that. We share different things with different people.

This user’s experience is indicative a larger growing trend on social media, and notably Instagram through the creation of Finstas, that as there is a clearer development of a digital identity that’s more selective in what’s presented and performance-based in a sense, there is also the development of ways to attempt to find more freedom in digital expression. In many ways it seems as thought the individual views their public accounts as platforms in which they may unconsciously present themselves in a more positive light, though they try to stay authentic and promote a destimatization of certain issues such as vulnerability. And yet, the intricacies found between digital identity and expression can be seen in the fact that while there’s an effort to make vulnerability more accepted through the individuals more public accounts, they also turn to their Finsta in order to find more freedom to be vulnerable. This begs some consideration of the morality of the situation. Can one truly say whether this is right or wrong? Is it a negative thing to feel as though one can share some part of their identity to an audience on a platform and not want to share everything but perhaps instead share it in another way such as through the use of a Finsta? Perhaps the key to keep in mind is the idea that the interviewee ends with. Just as Negroponte makes the point that there “are not two distinct states of being, black and white. We tend to move between them, and, depending on time available, time of day, and our mood, we will want lesser or greater degrees of personalization.” (1996, p. 154), this individual makes the point that depending on a variety of factors, people may have lesser or greater degrees to which they personalize their social media and decide what to share.

Interview 3

The individual interviewed was formerly active on Instagram with both a public account as well as a Finsta. They have now been off of Instagram for ~10 months and are not present on Facebook.

Q: What is your preferred platform of social media?

A: Right now, I’m mainly on Tumblr and I have a Twitter that I use. I used to have an Instagram but not anymore.

Q: What is it that first drew you to Instagram and what did you feel you got from it?

A: I think what first drew me in was seeing people, art, lifestyles, and places I had never seen before. I loved it, I thought it was real at the time and I sort of vicariously live through them. I also liked that I could present myself on my own terms. I was also able to keep up with my friends who I didn’t see everyday.

I felt like I got to share my perspective of things via Instagram. I’m pretty shy in real life and I’m also into photography so I felt like it gave me a space of self expression. So Instagram is kind of like, this is what I’m doing and I want you to know that. It’s like your public identity.

Q: Why did stop using Instagram?

A: I started to have this sort of Instagram crisis because I felt that my Instagram portrayal of myself was becoming inaccurate to who I am. So there was this growing gap between my real self and portrayal of myself. So I started trying to be more transparent on my Instagram but I felt really vulnerable, like I was putting too much information about myself. I was trying to balance putting a polished image of myself out there but also something that was me. I felt like my Instagram was a more artistic expression of myself rather than my everyday life. For example, I had all these pictures of myself traveling and looking cute but that’s not my everyday life. I had this sort of identity crisis as far as how do I want to portray myself, how vulnerable I wanted to be and what aspects of myself I wanted to share going on in my personal life too that just made figuring Instagram more confusing. I felt like I needed to step back from Instagram and I needed to put it on the side and figure things out in my own life and I needed distance to figure out what I wanted/needed to take away from Instagram. I feel like the pressure of where I grew up, everyone has fancy Instagram’s and everyone’s trying to show off the life they live and the fancy clothes they have and I needed to take a break from that sort of thinking because I also know that it’s not really real.

Q: Do you feel that your usage of social media developed/ created a digital identity of who you are? Do you feel that your digital identity is separate or different from your identity offline?

A: Yes definitely. I felt like this person on Instagram that I was presenting was so cool and sure of herself but in reality I felt ugly, I didn’t like my body, I wasn’t cool or interesting and I think in some ways my Instagram made me feel better about myself, even though it wasn’t an accurate portrayal of me. My past Instagram there was definitely a gap between my identities. I was always wearing makeup in my photos but I don’t actually wear makeup everyday. I feel like my past Instagram didn’t portray that I’m actually goofy and awkward and clumsy; the fact that I don’t always have it together. I might be looking cool and clean on Instagram but in real life, when I was going through this in my first year of college, I felt like a mess.

Q: Do you feel as though social media has created certain trends, norms, or expectations of how you should present yourself online or offline? If so, is that a bad thing?

A: Yes. Where I grew up, it made me feel like I either had to be a bikini model or this subculture or Asian women who look really good in makeup and have really good outfits. I definitely felt that expectation. I feel like a lot of brands have taken off and maybe a trend is that people feel the need to categorize themselves based on social media. So you see a lot of Instagrams which look similar to each other because they try to achieve the same aesthetic or life style goals. Also, Coachella. I don’t know if it’s a bad thing but it makes me jealous a lot and feel pretty lame and not that great about myself.

Q: Do you know what a Finsta is?

A: Yes, I used to have a Finsta. Just the existence of Finstas show that our Instagram is not our whole identity. I saw different types of Finstas. Some were just party pics to keep people’s parents from seeing. Others were where people posted about their personal lives to keep their closer friends updated.

Q: Do you think you’ll go back to using Instagram and/or other social media? If so, why?

A: I think I do want to make an Instagram again but I want to adjust my direction with it and sort my real life out first. And I’d get a Finsta just to document memories I’ve had with friends and funny moments which I’ve captured. Eventually I want to go back to Instagram when I feel like I want to be sharing my life. Because I still feel the initial attraction to it as a platform for sharing how I’m doing, what I like, my thoughts, my photography, and so I can interact with others and see how they’re doing.

Q: Is there anything else you want to comment on the subject of social media, self-expression, identity, etc. ?

A: I feel like I might always have a love-hate relationship with it because I’m always drawn to it and eventually I’ll go back but I think I’ll just have to be very aware of the things I’ve learned from Instagram. Taking it from my own experience, I’m not as cool as my Instagram presents so I don’t have to get jealous of other people’s Instagrams because they’re probably not as put together as they present.

This experience provides valuable insight into the growing pressures that people may feel regarding social media and the creation of an online persona. Maybe it’s not that the mere existence of differences in identities online and offline but where it becomes damaging is when the gap widens to the point that the two feel like two separate people or when it feels as though there’s a form of misrepresentation. Scholars have shown that identity misrepresentation in digital interactions can have an effect on how individuals behave and perceive themselves. (Segovia, 2005, p. 54). The major issue is when this self-perception feels foreign or inspires feelings of inadequacy or feels inauthentic or misleading. Sometimes the way one presents themselves online drives a need/ desire to live up to this expectation that others of ourselves may grow to have as way the case with this individual. But when one’s social media serves as a sort of highlight reel of the best moments, it’s exhausting and impossible to live up to that on a everyday basis. And it doesn’t help when there’s a wealth of individuals online all living these seemingly perfect lives that inspire feelings of jealousy. Sometimes people try to live up to these standard or emulate them as it feels as though in this “postindustrial society, every citizen can construct her own custom lifestyle and ‘select’ her ideology from a large (but not infinite) number or choices.” (Manovich, 2001, p. 42). Social media allows users to construct their own custom digital identity and image of their lifestyle. In some ways they can select this through an infinite amount of stylistic choices like themes and pull inspiration from “successful” social media persons. But the reality is that this is not always a sustainable or healthy way of leaving. When couples with the pressure to have a level of authenticity, individuals may feel a push to share more than they’re comfortable with. There may be “negative emotional costs to self-branding, including anxiety, information overload, lack of time, hurt feelings due to audience comments and interactions.” (Marwick, 2013, p. 196). Sometimes, it’s necessary to take a step back from all of this. Sometimes, one must reevaluate what it is that they’re gaining from a platform and whether they feel a sense of homeostasis and balance between who they appear to be online and in real life.

At its core, social media by design is all about controlled perception. With it, users are able to decide what to share, when to share it, who to share it with and oftentimes, because they choose they angle that they’re viewed in, they select the nicest light. Even when it comes to ways to combat this very structured style of online interaction and expression, there’s never a guarantee of a complete sense of freedom. So how does one balance their identity online and offline? How does one find outlets of expression in this digital age when there’s often times a battle between obligation to share too much or too little? How does one create an authentic online self and should that even be an expectation? In many ways the great irony of social media and life is that individuals are taught that they should care, but not too much, and in the end, people are left often times caring too much and are often times left vulnerable to the expectations set by others, society and by themselves. And when these individuals care, they’re scolded by the very society or individuals who told them to care in the first place. Because now they care supposedly care too much and as such as labeled as self-absorbed, selfish, and selfie-driven. What this line of thinking fails to take into account is the fact that while social media is by design controlled perception, it did not develop as such alone. The key word here being the world social. Maybe it’s not that social media bred a culture of individuals who care what others think and who yield the tools to choose how they are perceived digitally. Maybe it’s that’s social media is an extension of what exists in human nature- the ability to choose how one is perceived in everyday life and the tendency to pick the nicest life. Everyday, people make choices on how they appear, what words they say, what image they want to project. How can one applaud writers and scholars for their ability to do so and the next second criticize those for doing the same but online? In either case, it comes down to the stories or information one tells, the way the tell them and the impact left on the audience. It’s the way it’s done and the subjects that may cause controversy. But at the end of the day may the digital, the sciences and the humanities aren’t as different as one may think.

References

Baym , N. (2015). Personal Connections in the Digital Age. Polity Press.

Manovich, L. (2001). The Language of New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Marwick, A. E. (2013). Status update celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Negroponte, N. (1996). “Less is More.” Being Digital. New York: Vintage Books.

Segovia, K. and Bailenson, J. (2005). “Identity Manipulation What Happens When Identity Presentation is Not Truthful.” The Social Net: Understanding our online behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

van Dijck, J. (2007). Mediated memories in the digital age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

0 notes