Halloweekend has come and gone! Or as I like to say it, HALLE-weekend has come and gone. I spent my weekend doing work and staying, but on Friday I did go to a WAU/AUIAC/Art Guild party where I dressed up as The Powerpuff Girls with my friends. It was a lot of fun and a nice break from things!
Last class, we talked about celebrity activism for a large chunk of the class. PTJ talked about Nick Jonas, I talked about Yara Shahidi, Hannah brought up Emma Watson, the list goes on. In my opinion, it seemed as though the class regarded celebrity activism with disdain, but in my opinion, I think it can be beneficial. Although it's largely used to benefit themselves and better their reputation and widen their fan base, I believe that it can also be productive and impactful. For example, Taylor Swift posted on her Instagram that she was going to be voting in the midterm elections and encouraged her followers to do the same. It was later reported that after this was posted, over 60,000 Americans registered to vote. That's insane! The power of social media and celebrities is incredible and should be used for good in ways such as these.
0 Comments
How should we go about determining the answer to the question? How should the U.S. define the domestic content of automobiles, and why? Since we've spent two class sessions arguing from assigned points of view, we've elucidated some of the issues; now, taking the team assignments off, you have the opportunity to make your own, perhaps morehow should we go about determining the answer to the question? How should the U.S. define the domestic content of automobiles, and why?
I stand by my in-class stance. I believe that we should either leave domestic content rules as is, or weaken them. I believe in the environmental benefits of this more than anything else, as the environment is something that is on a deadline to be fixed, whereas the economy has some room to grow and change as time passes. That may appear as selfish to some or to the American people, but I choose to support environmental issues before economic ones because I am choosing to support the prosperity of everyone, including our future generations. Many Americans do not agree with this, but many Americans still deny climate change, so, what can you do? It's important to remember the environmental implications of the increase, decrease, or maintaining of domestic content rules because these implications follow us and have consequences that span much farther than most others. Foreign cars are, on average, cleaner and greener vehicles than those known as "American Made" (DIRTY FORD). In addition to environmental implications and consequences, I support the maintaining or decrease of United States domestic content laws because foreign auto brands also have beneficial impacts on our economy and are widely sold and preferred around the country. Strengthening domestic content rules would likely drive those brands out of the country and that would hurt our American people. I know that my family exclusively consumes German cars and I have done so for over forty years. To be forced out of this tradition would greatly anger my parents and I know it would do the same for many other American families. Ah, week 8! My first semester here at American seems to be flying by and as we pass this week and midterms come to a close, we reach a half-way mark in the semester. This semester has been pretty manageable for myself, and I've been able to maintain a social life AND do well in my classes! This is a bit of a change, as my high school life largely consisted of me being weighed down by the weight of AP classes, rarely leaving my house on the weekends unless it was something that had to do with my extracurriculars, such as volunteering. These days however, I go to class and do my own thing. I'm a part of WVAU, the college student run radio station here on campus. I write album reviews and host a radio show each Saturday. I am also the graphic design head for the Her Campus print magazine, and I'm helping to create the first ever Her Campus print magazine, which is super exciting.
I went to a performing arts high school, and I have a history of heat involvement in the arts. I had thought that when I came to AU, I would have to give that side of myself up in order to be more focused on my academics, however I find that it is an essential part of who I am, and I am perfectly capable of handling academics whilst relishing in my appreciation and participation of art, just like in high school! On to more academic things, we turned in our midterm papers a few days ago, and I gotta say, that was a STRUGGLE! It's challenging writing a paper without a rubric and little guidance. In the end, though, I think I produced a strong paper and I hope PTJ likes it. I didn't love the prompt, which was part of thee struggle. However, I was able to twist it in a way that allowed me to write about a topic I am extremely passionate about and I'm very happy about that. This week, PTJ gave us our midterm essay prompt. It's about US space exploration in relation to the international theories that we have covered in class and in our readings. I haven't looked at the full prompt that has ben posted on Blackboard, but I really should. His explanation in class was intriguing, but a tad bit vague, making me feel nervous for the task ahead. However, I'm ready to tackle the concepts of international theory in such an abstract way and receive PTJ's feedback on it.
We also talked a little bit about our minor simulation next week. I'm the Sierra Club this time around, an organization that works to further environmental legislation and conservation. I think it will be interesting to see how my opinion and power weighs in comparison to my fellow classmates, as most of them are unions and are in government related positions or organizations for the simulation. I'm looking forward to parent's weekend next week! I didn't think I would miss home at all, but as it turns out, California is pretty far away and pretty different from DC. I can't wait to go home in November and see my best friend, Bea and my puppy, Coco. I believe that the idea of double consciousness can be widely applied to all minority and marginalized groups. When one is a part of a minority group or is within a marginalized community, they are forced to exist in a way in which they are aware of the fact that they are regarded differently than their counterparts. However, I don't think that all peoples within marginalized communities are aware of this double consciousness.
Marginalized groups and minorities exist separately from just African Americans, and list globally. There are women, LGBTQ+ members, Asian Americans, Indigenous Peoples, just to name a few examples. All of these groups, in addition to the ones not listed, live double lives. The majority of them exist knowing that their identies within the marginalized community they are a part of cannot intersect with their identities as Americans or ‘proper’ citizens. They are held in a place in society that puts their marginalization before any other aspect of their identity. Oftentimes, their identity as a marginalized person defines them more than their actual character, especially to people outside of their community. This is useful to recognize and acknowledge when examining culture and society outside of the United States. The United States is not the only country that marginalizes groups and mistreats and generalizes communities as a whole. Racism, nativism, and xenophobia is a worldwide concept and can be found almost anywhere. We as humans seem inclined to dislike those who are not like us. This is what allows the double consciousness and maltreatment of said communities to manifest and prosper. Diplomatic Risk was a lot of fun. I enjoyed seeing my classmates get into character and showcase their competitive sides. Personally, I was very into the game and I wanted to win like no other. I was on the green team. We were at war with the yellow team and we were allies with the black team. We worked with the yellow team to cause a schism, creating the brown team, whom we later allied with. These actions put us on top.
Unfortunately, I did not get to see this play out in person because I had to miss class for Rosh Hashanah services. However, my teammates followed the instructions I so carefully wrote out for them and as a result, they were the top dogs for a bit! The next time we played Diplomatic Risk was outside of the classroom. We were quickly outdone by the red team. As good as it felt to be in the lead, I wasn't too bothered when we weren't anymore. It was a fun game and a bonding experience for the class, which I loved. I'm glad PTJ took the time to let us play this game. This week, World Politics was a wild ride. Our discussions ranged from alien simulations to the concepts of liberalism and realism. Part of why I enjoy this class so much is because I never really know what to expect. Professor Jackson likes to keep us on our toes and I appreciate that. It keeps our minds fresh and is allowing us to learn how to think on the spot, a skill that is more than necessary for the field that we all hope to venture into in the near future.
It was interesting to see how my peers reacted to the idea of an alien invasion. I was in a group with Kate, Alonso, and Hannah. We chose a less friendly approach as a means of protecting the world and our assets. We wanted to keep the people of the Earth safe before we made any treaties, alliances, or friendly relations with the aliens. Other people in the class chose to be quite friendly. Some were in the middle ground. Very few groups seemed prepared to strike back with aggression, which I found interesting. On Thursday, we touched based on Shotter. I came in late to this class because I had a meeting with my advisor, but I was still able to participate. I really enjoyed this in-class discussion because Alonso and I were able to discuss our ideas back and forth, which is rare in our World Politics class. Usually, we just build on each other's ideas and introduce new ones. My dialogue with Alonso was interesting, and helpful. I hope to engage in more discussions like this one in the future in World Politics. During our 5th week of classes and world politics, our cohort once again came together as a whole to ponder our class readings. I am always eager to go to world politics and hear what my peers have to say about what we have reviewed over the weekend. Personally, I am very glad that I am not in the normal world politics section. I love the intimacy of the global scholars section and the fact that I know and feel comfortable with everyone in the classroom. I feel like everyone has a voice and there very rarely is on voice that completely dominates the conversation. PTJ never rejects ideas either, but critiques them, which helps us to grow and realize new and improved ways of advancing our own thoughts and ideas.
I also particularly enjoy Professor Jackson's teaching style. Rather than just reviewing the material that we have read and spewing information back to us, he invites the class to analyze and pick apart what we are learning. I feel like PTJ is truly teaching me how to think, and I am immensely grateful for that. Midterms are just around the corner, which means that parent's weekend is just around the corner after that one! I'm not too worried about any of my midterms and I feel comfortable and confident in all of my classes. I'm eager to see our essay prompt for this class and I trust in PTJ to assign something thought provoking and interesting. I can't wait to showcase my writing abilities, as well as my knowledge of international theory. I know it won't be easy, but I'm ready for the challenge. If one wishes to achieve action, then persuasion is key in any effort.
When comparing convincing and persuading, the major differences seem to be that convincing leads to change in belief, but no action. Persuasion means action, but does not necessarily equal firm belief. In regard to public life, specifically politics, I agree with Shotter's and favor persuasion over convincing. Too often, initiatives and goals are left unachieved as a result of lack of action. If one strives to achieve those goals then action must be taken, meaning others must be persuaded. You must teach others before you can get them to jump on the thought train with you, especially if you want them to be truly informed and stick through the cause with you. Although it may not completely resolve the issue of the lack of universal participation in the shaping of our social lives, it will aid in the situation. Since the switch is being made from convincing to persuading, scientific fact and fact in general should not be completely focused upon when arguing. The one arguing should draw upon devices that aid their argument in terms of evoking feeling and igniting change, like the utilization of ethos and pathos. If one utilizes this method, then I believe that their argument will be much more effective. It's important to draw upon people's personal biases and experiences in order to gain support. If someone can empathize with you, they'll be a lot more likely to support you, or at least listen to what you have to say. Locke's argument of toleration is applicable to a number of controversies. One should strive for toleration in most aspects of life and most interactions with other. However, when it comes to the denial of scientific fact, bigotry, and other regressive ideals, toleration does not have a place.
For this reason, I do not think that toleration should be extended to the members of the Flat Earth Society. Members of the Flat Earth Society openly and actively deny basic, universally accepted scientific fact. Denial of science threatens the safety of global citizens each day, as seen in the abortion debate (does life begin at conception?) and many other controversial issues. If a member of the Flat Earth society was to hold a position in state government or cartography their dissenting opinion would most likely cause conflict and distraction within the work place. In this situation, dissenting opinion is not the issue, as diversity of thought should always be widely encouraged. Rather, the issue is that they are going against facts, so their dissenting opinion would cause inaccuracies and issues within the realm of policy, initiatives, and map-making. Even if a member of the society held a position in government or cartography and abided by the facts that are referred to and accepted within those spaces, I would still be in opposition, and see it as an issue of morality. This is because they would be going against what they believed in, in order to receive financial and career-related gain, thus acting out of their moral and philosophical compass. To me, this is wrong and yet another reason why Locke's argument of toleration should not be extended in this situation. |
Hey there! I'm Halle Jaymes and I'm a first year SIS student from Southern California. I'm hoping to focus on Europe as my region of study and hone in on sustainable fashion and general fashion in International Relations. Archives
December 2018
Categories |