The Reality ...Show?

My classmate, Summer Stewart recently posted an article “Presidents in the Visual Media” which focuses on the negative effects surrounding presidential candidates using entertainment media to gain support. Having presidential candidates gain support and win elections through their entertaining abilities isn’t by any means a new political strategy. As Stewart discusses in her post how John F. Kennedy defeated Richard Nixon through effective use of air time on the television to gain mass public support. It’s an issue that needs to be addressed because future presidents whomever they may be need to be great leaders not solely “charming”.

Stewart goes into detail about recent candidates trying to get as much air time on shows such as Saturday Night Live. The public should be offended that candidates are trying to gain support through these specific outlooks of entertainment. Ironically enough the shows these candidates make an appearance in an attempt to get their “message” across happen to be mainly comprised of comedy and satire news shows. Candidates have also been making a lot of appearances on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Fallon, and others. Just like their debates they only pick-at and make jokes at their competitors rather than actually conveying their aims and goals of their proposed administration in depth.

Stewart’s choice to quote Nixon over his race against Kennedy is very fitting: “It is a devastating commentary on the nature of television as a political medium that what hurt me the most in the first debate was not the substance of the encounter between Kennedy and me, but the disadvantageous contrast in our physical appearances.” However to further this it’s not just appearance that goes a long way, after all Trump has gained much attention through media through only the absurdities he says. Trump’s recent and most well-known bigoted remarks towards Latinos, “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime, They’re rapists.” A candidates ranking in the polls should have no correlation to abhorrent and false statements such as these, but it unfortunately shows.

I strongly agree with Stewart’s stance of being against candidates swaying the public to favor and support them through erroneous and fictitious appeal vicariously through our entertainment. It creates bias that isn’t based on facts of the candidate and their party. Sure it can be entertaining but it shouldn’t become the source of attention for politics. However it can be funny as when Colbert pokes at Trump once again on the recent video Time just released a of a bald eagle attacking Donald Trump back in August, which is not just comical but almost truthfully symbolic in how the United States feels towards Trump.

ISIS Puts The "isis" in Crisis

With the terrorist extremist organization ISIS’ (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) growing transgressions it’s important to maintain knowledgeable of what’s occurring on and who’s responsible and why, to prevent unnecessary harm to the innocent and effectively solve a very real threat to the United States and the world.

During the Iraq War the United States conquered Iraq because of alleged affiliations with weapons of mass destruction and terrorist organizations after the September 11 attacks in 2001. After the United States overthrew the dictator of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, they turned the government to the Shias (a sect of Islam), this however resulted in the Shias oppressing the Sunni’s (another sect of Islam). This led to a gruesome Iraqi civil war in 2006 where the Sunni’s rebelled. Since then only more violence and destabilization in the region has occurred.

ISIS was one of many groups that came into Iraq during the civil war. ISIS is supplied and funded by Qatar an ally of the United States that we sell large amount of militarized equipment to. ISIS has well trained fanatical soldiers that are responsible for the recent Paris attacks (link to article) and many other atrocities around the world. Their goal is to destroy anything that differs from their extreme beliefs to create one super Islamic (Sunni) State which encompasses Syria and Iraq as of now. ISIS has demonstrated itself as the most fanatic and violent terrorist organization yet which is causing them to even lose support from other terrorist organizations but unfortunately they’ve already gained enough power to support and continue themselves.

Since then more world super powers have become involved in the region. This is causing things to escalate quickly. Countries like the United States and Russia are supporting opposing groups. Russia is now taking a bolder presence in Syria and attacking targets. BBC recently covered the incident that unfolded as Turkey downed a Russian war plane for flying allegedly Turkish airspace (link to article). Turkey being a NATO ally with the United States and an important economic partner with Russia really strains multiple relations after this incident. France after the Paris attacks are planning more targets to strategically bomb in Syria, BBC article here. With the various groups and world super powers becoming involved the situation is becoming more and more potent for global catastrophe (one of ISIS’ goals). Everyone is against ISIS, but there are many other groups within the conflict that have conflicting and crossing allegiances which makes the entire conflict a very sensitive and dangerous situation.

Guilty as...

Summer Stewart a colleague of mine posted recently an online article Refusing Justice on her blog We The People that discusses the horrible injustices of the United State’s justice system. These injustices coming from the lack of care for due process and cheating cases of a fair trial. It’s an important issue in the United States, because we need a system that’s responsible and accountable; we want criminals in jail not the innocent.

Stewart explains how the Department of Justice and the FBI have forwardly stated that forensic evidence can be faulty. She does a great job exposing this unacceptable truth of our system. What’s worse as she points out is that to prove your innocence becomes almost impossible, “…in Alabama, a defendant has to be able to prove there is no evidence connecting he/she to the crime. Even if the suspect is innocent, but evidence roves some connection, the have no opportunity to even suggest their case to be re-looked at.” Scary to imagine being innocent and accused of something you didn’t and being punished for it for the rest of your life.

Her article reminded of the incident that occurred two years ago that just astonished me. CNN covered the story about how Annie Dookhan an Ex-Massachusetts chemist who tampered over 40,000 cases, and falsified her academic records for the job. How can we have a system that allows something slip like that long enough to ruin over 40,000 lives. It’s atrocious that they let an unqualified person handle sensitive evidence that determined the lives of so many.

Another issue that wasn’t mentioned in Stewart’s article was the forging and or falsifying of forensic evidence from within or outside the system. As the technology has advanced this has become increasingly possible. In the article DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show, by Andrew Pollack, published in the New York Times  covers how scientists were successful in fabricating blood and saliva samples. They discussed how if they had a DNA data base at their disposal they could fabricate blood and saliva without having to obtain tissue or any other source of DNA; so even with the best forensic equipment someone could fake a crime scene and no one would know.

Stewart did a wonderful job covering this topic and I strongly agree with her that the FBI and Department of Justice become more accountable and responsible so the innocent are never “guilty” of something they didn’t do.

In the Dark

How safe do you feel in the U.S, in your city, in your neighborhood, with your finances and personal information? For many the answer is that they don’t. It’s because we live in a system that subdues the general public; either they are policed or the system gives them just enough to live comfortably and not revolt. We live in a society where we are raised to perceive war as big, explosive, and bluntly violent. The reality of war in this age is no longer that exposed.

The real war is in the shadows. War is about attaining and maintaining the power in an epoch through any and all effective and efficient means. We live in an age of abundant information and wondrous technology. It’s all very promising and has brought the world closer and more peacefully together but it all also happens to be exceptionally harmful. Before I continue here is quote from an ancient Chinese general to consider:

“The supreme art of war

 is to subdue the enemy

without fighting” –Sun Tzu

In the book Freakonomics Stephen J. Dubner and Steven Levitt explain how gang leaders in the United States avoid violence and warring between one another because it’s bad for business (of course it still happens because the leaders aren’t the young men doing the work on the streets amped up and ready to fight). So how should this be any different from how the U.S and other countries conduct their affairs domestically and foreign.

Entities will use today’s technology to watch information and use it to subdue its enemies and even constituents without blunt force. Force will continue to be used but in more strategical ways such as we witness the militarization of the police in the United States. Homeland Security has already given technology called StingRay to Police across the United States which acts as if it were a cell tower so any phones in the area transmits and receives any data through it.

We have sensitive systems that run power plants, hospitals, banks, and more that can be hacked. The damage done can be amplified tenfold through these technologically advanced systems. Wars will be fought through crippling the enemies systems and using it and their information against them.

This is happening and it’s not just governments but people or other groups who doing this.  For example Edward Snowden who revealed sensitive government information on WikiLeaks and Anonymous who just allegedly hacked databased containing information of U.S senators involved with the KKK.

We will see informational and economic warfare much more prominently in this century.

A Tip of the Hat to Mr. Meyer for Opposing Tipping

Saru Jayaraman’s article “Why Tipping Is Wrong” posted in The New York Times follows a new movement started by the New York based restaurateur Danny Meyer to eliminate the inequities caused by a society that tips and to bring awareness of what it really means to tip.

Meyer’s change to the industry isn’t just out of an economic cause but also because of an ethical and historical reason. Jayaraman discusses how tipping originated from European aristocratic societies and that during the end of the 19^th century Americans travelling Europe returned with this practice and began incorporating it into American culture. This is where tipping begin to grow into a racial issue as Jayaraman cites a writer from the period saying “he could never feel comfortable tipping a white person, since the practice should be reserved for ‘Negroes.’” We shouldn’t continue a system that is clearly defined by inequity.

Jayaraman later reinforces the racial element in the industry with recent statistics: “The racialized element of the practice continues to this day: 53 percent of tipped workers in New York State are minorities, and 21 percent live at or below the poverty line.

The article also covers loop holes in the system, stating how Governor Andrew M. Cuomo supported a statewide $15 minimum wage but it would exclude all workers who are tipped. Meyer is infuriated by the “un-American” aspect of the food industry and I would have to agree with him; it presents too many opportunities for workers to be taken advantage of.

Personally I’ve had many different friends work a similar job at different restaurants and yet each would tell me their earnings and tips and I would immediately notice a stark difference. They were both good workers and personable and it was unfortunate to see. Tipping is great if it’s working in your favor, or to be rewarded a little extra for good service, but having wages rely on your tips and understanding what tipping originates from is unethical and far from fair. I would have to agree with Danny Meyer’s stance on changing the industries standard. That said, salaries for certain occupations must be kept to realistic margins.

The Real Poverty Crisis Explained by Paul Theroux

In the article posted on the New York Times, “The Hypocrisy of Helping the Poor” by Paul Theroux reveals the facade of CEO’s helping the poor, when in reality they are usually the reason behind poverty. Paul Theroux is writing mainly to middle-class Americans, but his intention is to make the entire Nation aware and for everyone (especially wealthy CEO’s) to begin demonstrating more accountability and responsibility towards this crisis that threatens our country. Paul Theroux, is an established American novelist, critic, traveler and writer.

Theroux discusses how American investment in China has solved their poverty crisis, because of American corporations relocating jobs from the United States. We are in turn trading with places like China our success for their poverty (except for the few American CEO’s and corporations who benefit). Then for public image, CEO’s, donate to charity as a ploy to cover how they are the cause behind growing mass poverty in the States. “When Mr. Cook of Apple said he was going to hand over his entire fortune to charity, he was greatly praised by most people, but not [Theroux].” I have to agree with him; infrequent sums money no matter how large does not solve poverty. However a structured, financially stable plan does.

Visiting the Deep South, Theroux, recollects what predominantly stayed with him from his visit: “the sight of shutdown factories and towns with their hearts torn out of them, and few jobs.” During his visit he takes in account the true damage done.

 From his personal experience and research into this crisis he fills the article with very revealing information and opinions. An opinion he shares is quite notable, “To me, globalization is the search for a new plantation, and cheaper labor; globalization means that, by outsourcing, it is possible to impoverish an American community to…where it is indistinguishable…[from] a third world country.”

The article makes substantial claims and provides frightening evidence of how big business through globalization embarks on pursuing massive profits by vicariously draining communities to desolation, instead of prioritizing sustainability in global and domestic economies. Theroux is right and I agree with him completely. If we are to level out from our decline as a nation we need to bring back industry to us. 

Constant Associative Hate

A recent article posted by the BBC following Donald Trump’s rally in New Hampshire focuses its attention on a supporter who states, “We have a problem in this country, it’s called Muslims. We know our current president is one.” The article expresses the disapproval of many substantial political figures and provides a video of Mr. Trump attempting to laugh off the comments and to some degree even entertain this supporter’s questions before jumping to a question from a different supporter.

 Mr. Trump has taken fire from not righting this man’s statement. Mr. Trump’s actions demonstrate his lack of contempt for ignorant and “hateful rhetoric” (Hillary Clinton) in America. Even people in the audience behind Trump had mouths dropped and were nodding their heads in disagreement to the supporter’s statement. No, Obama is not a Muslim and yes he was born in the U.S. (A brief video on the history of attack on Obama’s national and religious validity is shown within the article.)

What is important about articles like these are the meta-issues beneath. We have a country founded and evolved on the basis of freedom and strength of diversity, yet we are under constant threat from that diversity domestic and foreign. It’s important to not discriminate, marginalize, or generalize a community of people within the United States solely because of some association to extremists who do commit acts of terrorism.