Introduction

The world is an increasingly carnivorous place. Vegans and vegetarians make up merely 0.96% and 2.64% of the American population respectively.[1] According to a nationwide telephone survey conducted from June to July of 2007, animal welfare is ranked low on scale of importance when compared with other social issues like health care, poverty, and food safety.[2] Such issues were ranked as five times more important than farm animal welfare.[3] Consumers think that the financial well being of farmers is more important than food prices and the welfare of farm animals.[4] 81% of respondents believed that animals and humans have the same capacity to feel pain, but said that human suffering should take precedence over animal suffering.[5] Although 62% said that animal suffering should still be addressed, even if humans were suffering simultaneously, they also said that they would be willing to let 11,500 animals suffer if it meant relieving the pain of one human’s suffering.[6]

Many Americans are willing to pay for improved animal welfare because they know that there is a correlation between increased animal welfare and raised meat prices. 40% of those surveyed said that ethics should be primarily taken into consideration when determining how to treat farm animals while 45% thought that scientific opinions should be used instead.[7] However, it is possible that many respondents falsified their preferences in order to present themselves favorably, so it is quite possible that even fewer Americans than projected care deeply for the well being of animals. In response to such a possibility, this issue brief is being constructed in order to garner support and raise awareness about the often misleading world of the meat industry in the United States and abroad.

 

The Stakeholders (not “Steakholders”)

In order for change to occur, all stakeholders must be motivated and involved.[8] The stakeholders are comprised of everyone, groups and individuals alike, because everyone is affected by the meat industry in some way.[9] This issue brief was meant for those who were in the dark about the consequences of the meat industry and who could be inspired to adopt a modified, more meat-free (if not vegetarian) diet after reading the materials.

 

A Brief History of American Vegetarian Awareness

Since prehistoric times, humans have been interacting with their fellow animals. We were threatened by those more powerful than us, and managed to domesticate some species to our advantage for food, work, and even companionship. Accompanying the domestication of animals, many rules, regulations, and laws were put into place by various cultures in order to properly deal with these animals.[10] Ancient Kosher and Halal customs of slaughtering animals were meant to minimize the pain and suffering of the animals.[11] The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was founded in Great Britain in 1824.[12] The Animal Welfare Act was signed into law in the United States in 1966. This law regulates the treatment of animals in research, transport, exhibition, and by dealers. It poses a minimum acceptable standard of codes of conduct towards animals. It has been amended several times, most recently in 2008.[13]

While codes of conduct toward animal welfare have been in place for hundreds of years, over the past twenty years, consumers, primarily in industrialized nations, have shed light on the topic of animal welfare.[14] Typically, the wealthier someone is, the surer they are of the quantity of the food they will receive, so they can begin to focus on the quality of the food, including food safety, how it is produced, and what its impacts on the environment, labor, and animal welfare are.[15] Some consumer movements that have arisen in response to increased awareness of and attention on the meat industry have included movements that advocate for the absolute abolition of all use of animals except for economic gains.[16] Other groups have made efforts to improve the treatment of animals in the meat industry.[17] In the European Union, these groups have attracted the attention of the government as well as the general population.[18] Consequentially, numerous laws have been enacted that regulate how farm animals are to be treated.[19] These laws can regulate domestic production but not production abroad.[20] This is problematic because the United States has few regulations or laws in place to protect animal welfare.[21]

 

Environmental Impacts of Meat Industry

Factory farms, run by corporations, replaced small family farms with massive industrial complexes and free-grazing herds with warehouses to feed and house thousands of pigs, chickens, or turkeys in a single facility.[22] The number of animals produced for consumption in the United States has greatly increased over the last 30 years, but the number of livestock and poultry producing facilities has greatly decreased.[23]

The global meat production industry is one of the largest contributors to the destruction of the environment.[24] Factory farms consume water, land, and resources at rates that are unsustainable.[25] They contribute to the degradation of the environment, air and water pollution, large-scale fish deaths, depletion of the soil, and disappearing biodiversity.[26] The meat industry is more resource-intensive than other forms of food production. “Meat livestock use 30% of ice-free land globally, 80% of global freshwater, and produce 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions which is more than the global transportation sector.”[27] The meat industry is also largely responsible for habitat loss and deforestation.[28] 34% of the global greenhouse gas emissions of the meat industry are from deforestation, methane emissions, and manure management.”[29]

Grain that is fed to livestock instead of humans creates huge energy loss.[30] Furthermore, as Peter Singer wrote in his 1975 book, Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals, the crops used to feed the livestock of the American meat industry could feed the world three times over. Demand for meat in the United States has increased astronomically since the 1970s, so imagine how much of the world could be fed just by American livestock crops in 2015. The global meat industry was expected to double between 1999 and 2050, which will also double the meat industry’s environmental impacts unless a more sustainable method of meat production is found, if people insist upon consuming it.[31]

Factory farms create a serious waste problem by creating an astronomical amount of waste each year weighing in at approximately 500 million tons per year, which is three times the amount of all human waste in the United States.[32] The waste is stored in “lagoons,” giant concrete or earthen pits.[33] When the lagoons are full, the remaining waste is sprayed untreated on nearby fields as fertilizer.[34] These lagoons are prone to spills and collapses and pose health risks to workers, nearby residents, and the environment, they have been outlawed in some states but still remain quite common.[35] Animal waste has high concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus, so it poses a major risk to groundwater and surface water. When it gets into streams and rivers, it stifles oxygen in water, suffocating fish and causing algal growth.[36]

The air pollution caused by factory farms has recently been recognized as dangerous.[37] Not only do the odors affect the moods and quality of life of nearby people, but “studies have found hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, volatile organic compounds, and particulate matter concentrations at unsafe levels in and around factory farms.”[38] Workers and residents exposed to this pollution suffer nausea, breathing trouble, nervous system impairment, and chronic lung irritation.[39] While factory farm workers and neighbors are most at risk of compromised health and environmental dangers, pollution from factory farms endangers the entire population as a whole. Smog and contaminated urban drinking water supplies are among the complications that endanger society.[40] Furthermore, the antibiotics added to animal feed in factory farms could make human diseases harder to treat and cure.[41]

Factory farms pollute because of pricing pressure, advances in technology and veterinary antibiotics, and industry consolidation.[42] The environmental and health risks from factory farms call for government action, sufficient regulation of factory farms is lacking.[43] This is because there is a lack of historical data on factory farms emissions and because public opposition has failed to lead to regulation.[44] It is a game of power politics in which small rural residents and farmers are harmed but huge corporations are benefitted by factory farms.

Because factory farms, or “confined animal feeding operations,” (CAFOs) are detrimental to regional air and water quality, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), states, and environmental groups have recently tried to bring more attention to CAFOs.[45] However, it is difficult to formulate regulation for CAFOs because of politics, scientific obstacles, and the time and costs required.[46] Because American environmental laws have been in existence longer than factory farms, the factory farms are largely exempt from emissions regulations. Farms, especially factory farms, are among the last industries to function outside of regulations.[47] Only recently have legislators and regulators been paying attention to the demands to regulate CAFOs. In recent history, a series of lawsuits let to the Clean Air Act of 2003 and the Clean Air Act of 2005, in which the EPA agreed to start testing the factory farms’ air emissions, hopefully ultimately restricting emissions.[48] The Sierra Club led a number of civil suits against major meat producers for disobeying federal emissions reporting requirements. Such steps focus on the production and reporting of emissions information. The provision of information means more regulation and better awareness and behavior of factory farm polluters.[49] The Department of Justice and the Sierra Club will enforce such regulations and policies.[50] These steps are not enough to fix the overwhelming problem of CAFO pollution, but serve as hopeful turning points.

An interesting alternative to traditional factory farmed meat is a new phenomenon called “cultured meat.” Cultured meat is “meat produced in vitro using tissue engineering techniques; animal tissue will be grown in vitro instead of growing entire animals.”[51] The overall impacts of cultured meat are much lower than those of conventionally produced meat.[52] Cultured meat can prevent the spread of animal-borne diseases such as Mad Cow Disease.[53] The texture, taste, and nutrition of cultured meat can be manipulated using controlled conditions.[54] This means that nutrition-related diseases caused by meat eating could be reduced if not eliminated. Results show that cultured meat production produces far fewer emissions and requires only a fraction of the land and water required than traditionally produced meat.[55] Cultured meat, despite having been begun in the 1950s, is still only at the research stage.[56] It is currently grown small-scale in labs.[57] Large-scale production would require more research and about $160 million in investments in order to commercialize it as a product.[58]

 

Health Complications of an Omnivorous Diet

Vegetarian diets are comprised primarily of cereals, legumes, nuts, fruits, and vegetables, possibly including eggs and dairy products.[59] Vegans do not consume any animals or animal products. A vegetarian diet has less saturated fat and more starch, fruits, and vegetables than a non-vegetarian diet.

Much research and many studies support the notion that eating a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle is healthier than an omnivorous or carnivorous diet. Western vegetarians have, on average, a lower body mass index (BMI) than non-vegetarians, lower average cholesterol, and a lower mortality rate by approximately 25%.[60] Being a vegetarian also lowers the risk of diseases like constipation, gallstones, appendicitis, and diverticular disease.[61] Studies show that in Britain alone, beginning a vegetarian diet could prevent about 40,000 deaths per year from cardiovascular disease.[62] Vegetarians are, on average, thinner than non-vegetarians.[63]

Animal fat is the culprit behind many chronic degenerative diseases, especially cardiovascular disease and some cancers; diets high in fat and low in fiber could lead to colon caner.[64] The pesticides used in and the pollution caused by the meat industry are associated with higher risks of cancer among both workers and consumers of the meat industry.[65] Hunger and food insecurity are not currently due to lack of food resources, but because of “insufficient political will or moral imperative to change the way food is allocated.”[66] “The developing world alone is producing enough food to provide every person with more than 2,500 calories per day,” yet millions of people continue to starve as the resources are spent on the meat industry.[67] If the meat industry continues like this, food scarcity could soon become a prominent problem.[68] It is imperative that food producers realize and recognize that resources are finite and that long-term interests must be pursued and addressed. Even slight reductions in meat consumption could improve the health of individuals, the quality of the environment, and the lives of many livestock.

 

Economic Consequences of Meat Market

In 1996, the United States government spent $68.7 billion on agricultural subsidies.[69] Our food does not come inexpensively, contrary to what we are led to believe by the cheap food prices at the grocery store. This generates a false sense of security; these costs do not even include the costs of cleaning up pollution.

Many consumers in industrialized nations are willing to pay more for products that were produced under conditions of higher animal welfare. In a survey of British consumers, it was shown that consumers would pay between six and 30% more for eggs if the inhuman towers of battery cages would be banned for hens.[70] If the amount that people are willing to pay for products of higher animal welfare is great enough, then producers have sufficient incentive to produce such goods.[71] This could also create incentive to mislead consumers, however. Firms have an incentive to disclose desirable information and details, but not the undesirable qualities.[72]

Consumers, acting independently, will act selfishly, without concern about the external ramifications such as noise, pollution, decreased animal welfare, and other costs.[73] The government may then step in to regulate costly behavior and encourage or subsidize the less costly behavior.[74] Governments might try to measure the costs and benefits of animal welfare regulations in the form of studies or surveys to ensure that the views and values reflect those of society as a whole.[75] If the private benefits of consumers do not outweigh the animal welfare costs, the government must step in and decide whether the individual and the collective benefits outweigh the costs of imposing regulation.[76] Animal welfare laws typically cost a lot because they increase production costs.[77]

 

Ethics of Animal Welfare

In the past thirty years or so, food has become a means of personal expression. People use it to convey their identity, opinions, and moral convictions. This has led people to express concern over the treatment of livestock and the methods of slaughtering. New activist groups have emerged with animal welfare and rights as the central issue.[78] The way animals are treated in a society speaks volumes about the morality of such a society.[79]

“Ethical vegetarians” choose not to eat meat because they believe it is morally wrong. “Although they recognize that eating meat is also detrimental to their health, ethical vegetarians understand that vegetarianism is an encompassing commitment to a way of life.”[80] They are upset by others who eat meat because they see vegetarianism as a “moral imperative.”[81] This is entirely different from vegetarianism who abstain from eating meat for health or religious reasons.

“Moralization is the process where a preference is converted into a value.”[82] Moralization is both an individual and a societal process that transforms certain objects or actions from morally neutral to having moral qualities.[83] Multiple reasons are sought to justify a conviction when something becomes moralized. In terms of the anti-factory-farming movement, the justifications that are usually used include the destruction of the small family farm, environmental degradation, animal welfare concerns, and disgust at the un-natural methods of breeding and raising animals.[84]

Farm animal welfare is controversial and complicated. For example, in factory farms, many animals are kept in crates or cages. This is controversial because while it protects them from predators and each other, it is also a confining, uncomfortable environment for an animal to spend its life in.[85] Three overlapping ethical concerns of animal rights activists for the quality of life of animals are: 1. Animals should lead natural lives using their natural abilities and adaptations, 2. Animals should be free of prolonged intense fear, pain, and other negative states, and should experience normal pleasures, 3. Animals should be healthy, grow, and function normally both behaviorally and physiologically.[86]

Although much concern about animal welfare from activist and industry groups has been heeded, the group of people most affected, the consumers, have largely not been heard on the issue.[87] Vegetarianism is largely comprised of females.[88] Teenage vegetarians are typically white, from a higher socio-economic class, practice methods of weight-control and weight-loss, and have an increased concern for the environment, animal welfare, and gender equality when compared to their meat-eating peers.[89] Moral vegetarianism is often viewed as an extreme example of the general public opinion regarding farming practices.[90] This general opinion is typically concerned with a combination of animal welfare, human health, and environmental issues.[91]

Livestock producers should greatly take into consideration this gender-oriented advocacy of vegetarianism because women currently and will most likely continue to have a strong, disproportionate influence on the purchasing of food for households.[92]

 

Policy Possibilities

Science is usually used as the foundation of public policy, but in the case of animal welfare protestations, it is often coupled with morality.[93] However, as of recently, media has been the most influential platform for the raising of awareness of animal rights issues and for the expression of concern and questions over such treatment.[94] Media sets up the political agenda by playing up or marginalizing people and issues.[95] Media coverage can both help and harm animal rights special interest groups.[96]

It has been proposed that supporters of the regulation of factory farms instead consider a different approach that focuses on something called “reflexive law.”[97] Reflexive law is a set of information-based tools that decide which and how much information is to be disclosed to the public.[98] This information is in the form of “raw data, hazard warnings, or environmental labels.”[99] It shames polluters and provides an outlet for consumers, business partners, and shareholders to express their dismay at the pollution caused by the meat industry.[100] Reflexive law is also faster and less expensive to put into place than “command-and-control” regulation.[101]

The number of interest groups that take part in political lobbying has exploded since 1970. In the United States, the number doubled between 1955 and 1990, doubled again from 1970 to 1990, and reached 20,000 official interest groups in 1995.[102] Recently, new social interest groups have emerged that no longer rely on political lobbying and legislative to achieve their political goals. They instead use media to influence marketing and consequentially the decisions of consumers. This is effective for three reasons: the passing of legislation is slow and blocked, consumers are increasingly affluent, and targeting the food market is now easier because it is more concentrated.[103]

Decisions made by the government regarding food safety, farming practices, and animal welfare increasingly reflect the view of the people as a whole.[104] Moralization transforms personal preferences into societal values, which are more likely than preferences to be institutionally and legally supported.[105] An example of this is Bill C-22, which is an amendment to the Canadian Criminal Code to protect animals, which resulted from moralization.[106] A wide variety of potential policy outcomes exist to deal with farm animal welfare, and all of them are rooted in moralization.[107] “Legislation enforcing minimum standards combined with subsidy payments as incentives would be the best policy approach.”[108] “Considering societal trends, it may be prudent if decision makers in livestock production methods were to take into consideration or at minimum acknowledge factors other than science in a long-term vision of sustainable and ethically supportable agricultural production systems.”[109]

The United States is behind on factory farm regulation and animal welfare laws, but some other countries have stepped ahead. In Swiss society, animal welfare is an important issue. Swiss policy makers have reacted with strict animal protection legislation and two programs to promote animal-friendly farming.[110] Also, the European Union adopted the “Protocol on Protection and Welfare of Animals.”[111]

However, the construction of policy regarding animal welfare is challenging. The government must carefully weigh costs and benefits when making legislative and regulatory changes and decisions.[112] “Good welfare provides private productivity benefits to producers and some level of positive external benefits to people who care about animal welfare status.”[113]

 

Conclusion

In conclusion, this issue brief makes the case for vegetarianism for four reasons. First, the meat industry is largely responsible for the degradation of the environment. Second, a meat-free diet is much healthier than an omnivorous or carnivorous diet. Third, the meat industry takes a large toll on the domestic and global economies and much money could be spent on other important institutions but is instead spent on the meat industry. Finally, many see the killing and treatment of animals in the meat industry to be unethical and morally wrong. Cutting down even a little bit on meat consumption would reduce each of these four problems substantially.

 

Works Cited

“Animal Welfare Act.” Animal Welfare Act. USDA, 8 Apr. 2015. Web. 09 Apr. 2015. <http://awic.nal.usda.gov/government-and-professional-resources/federal-laws/animal-welfare-act>.

Barclay, Eliza. “A Nation Of Meat Eaters: See How It All Adds Up.” NPR. NPR, 27 June 2012. Web. 09 Apr. 2015. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/06/27/155527365/visualizing-a-nation-of-meat-eaters>.

Braunig, Warren A. “Reflexive Law Solutions for Factory Farm Pollution Note.” Heinonline. N.Y.U., 2005. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals%2Fnylr80&div=41&g_sent=1&collection=journals#1534>.

Brown, K. H., and J. Hollingsworth. “The Food Marketing Institute and the National Council of Chain Restaurants: Animal Welfare and the Retail Food Industry in the United States of America.” Europe PubMed Central, 2005. Web. 09 Apr. 2015. <http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/16358516>.

De Pasille, A.M., and J. Rushen. “Food Safety and Environmental Issues in Animal Welfare.” (2005): 757-59. 2005. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://www22.sede.embrapa.br/snt/piue/Produ%E7%E3o%20Integrada%20na%20Uni%E3o%20Europ%E9ia/B)%20Comunidade%20Econ%F4mica%20Europeia/B10)%20Bem-Estar%20dos%20Animais/B10.3)%20Trabalhos%20T%E9cnicos%20Bem-Estar%20dos%20Animais/Pasille%20-%20Modern%20food%20production%20systems.pdf>.

Fraser, D., D. M. Weary, E. A. Pajor, and B. N. Milligan. “A Scientific Conception Of Animal Welfare That Reflects Ethical Concerns.” (n.d.): n. pag. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 3 Feb. 1997. Web. 8 Apr. 2015. <http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/animalwelfare/Fraser1997.pdf>.

Goddard, Ellen, Peter Boxall, Jean Paul Emenu, Curtis Boyd, Andre Asselin, and Amanda Neall. “RSA Impact Report 2006.” RSA Journal 153.5524 (2006): 1-24. University of Alberta, July 2007. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://rees.ualberta.ca/en/Research/~/media/rees/Research/Documents/Project%20Reports/PR_07-03.pdf>.

Horgan, R., and A. Gavinelli. “The Expanding Role of Animal Welfare within EU Legislation and beyond.” Livestock Science, 03 Sept. 2006. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS1871141306001983>.

Horrigan, Leo, Robert S. Lawrence, and Polly Walker. “How Sustainable Agriculture Can Address the Environmental and Human Health Harms of Industrial Agriculture.” Research Review (2002): 445-54. May 2002. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1240832/pdf/ehp0110-000445.pdf>.

Jones, Dena M. “The Media and Policy Decisions Affecting Animals.” Latest TOC RSS. Bloomsbury Journals, 1997. Web. 09 Apr. 2015. <http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bloomsbury/azoos/1997/00000010/00000001/art00003>.

Key, Timothy, and Gwyneth Davey. “Prevalence of Obesity Is Low in People Who Do Not Eat Meat.” Hwadmin. Thebmj, 1996. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://www.bmj.com/content/313/7060/816.short>.

Key, Timothy J., Gwyneth K. Davey, and Paul N. Appleby. “Health Benefits of a Vegetarian Diet.” Cambridge Journals Online. The Nutrition Society, 1999. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=8&fid=795576&jid=PNS&volumeId=58&issueId=02&aid=795568&bodyId=&membershipNumber=&societyETOCSession=>.

McVittie, Alistair. “Public Preferences for Broiler Chicken Welfare: Evidence from Stated Preference Studies.” Number 3. Public Preferences for Broiler Chicken Welfare: Evidence from Stated Preference Studies (n.d.): n. pag. Land Economy. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/45990/2/Work3McVittie.pdf>.

Mitchell, Lorraine. “Changing Structure of Global Food Consumption and Trade.” Google Books. Economic Research Service/USDA, n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=wvZIXf2azKkC&oi=fnd&pg=PA80&dq=related%3ANAdG6TpH8fkJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F&ots=8Tr6YBfUs1&sig=nUPvLNxAh3SC3M_rxH2q51DzYbk#v=onepage&q&f=false 80-84.

Norwood, F. Bailey, Associate Professor, Jayson L. Lusk, and Professor And Willard Sparks Chair Of Agribusiness. “Consumer Preferences for Farm Animal Welfare: Results of a Nationwide Telephone Survey.” (2007): n. pag. Oklahoma State University, 17 Aug. 2007. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://asp.okstate.edu/baileynorwood/survey4/files/initialreporttoafb.pdf>.

Phan-Huy, Sibyl A., and Ruth B. Fawaz. “Swiss Market For Meat From Animal-Friendly Production – Responses Of Public And Private Actors In Switzerland.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 30 Sept. 2001. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://download-v2.springer.com/static/pdf/288/art%253A10.1023%252FA%253A1022992200547.pdf?token2=exp=1428559041~acl=%2Fstatic%2Fpdf%2F288%2Fart%25253A10.1023%25252FA%25253A1022992200547.pdf*~hmac=88fd92bd24d12fd3c6728d6606b8ad1ed838c5d77d808b5d5ca74b448deae610>.

Tuomisto, Hanna L., and M. Joost Teixara De Mattos. “Environmental Impacts of Cultured Meat Production.” Environmental Science & Technology. Environmental Science and Technology, 2011. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es200130u>.

Whiting, Terry. “Animal Welfare Groups – Who’s Who And What’s What.” London Swine Conference, Apr. 2005. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. http://www.londonswineconference.ca/proceedings/2005/2005.pdf#page=80.

On Wednesday March 18 from 3:00-4:15pm in room seven of the Business Building, another Rhetoric and Civic Life class hosted a deliberation called “50 Shades of Consent.” The deliberation discussed the growing issue of sexual assault, particularly on college campuses like Penn State.

The deliberation began with the moderators briefly introducing themselves. There were too many people in the audience for it to feasibly introduce itself, so the moderators improvised and asked the audience to voluntarily introduce themselves. The audience was surprisingly eager to volunteer. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the members of the deliberation team as well as their professor eagerly participated in the deliberation which added much to the discussion and created a more casual flow to things. Speaking of casual, everyone, including the moderators and professor, was dressed casually which helped create that casual, relaxed atmosphere, but I think it’s always better to dress up rather than down, especially as a presenter.

The deliberation team did not use any notecards and seemed to really know what they were talking about which was refreshing for the audience. They wrote down on chalkboards the points people brought up throughout the discussion. The setup of the room was perfect. It was in room seven of the Business Building, as mentioned, and was set up in a semi-circular fashion with a podium at the front/bottom of the room and chalkboards behind the podium. The seats and desks were spacious and comfortable and their arrangement fostered communication, eye contact, and discussion. Instead of the entire deliberation team standing or sitting at the front of the room, each approach mini-team would take turns stepping up to the podium while the rest of the team sat and participated with the audience. I really liked this – it seemed professional and made good use of the available space. The approach teams asked good discussion questions and went even further by asking excellent follow-up questions to the discussion questions when the audience seemed a bit stumped. The deliberation teams were very calm and collected and this encouraged the audience to participate freely.

The content of each approach was relevant, insightful, and thought-provoking, and contributed to the larger building of a potential solution. Approach one discussed the subject of sexual assault from the aspect of offenders and how they should be punished and discouraged from perpetrating acts of sexual violence in the first place. Approach two broached the topic of education as a means of ending and preventing sexual violence perhaps in the form of a mandatory course or at least part of a course that would serve to educate students about sexual violence and its consequences. Approach three focused on the prevention of sexual violence on campus — Penn State has policies in place for dealing with sexual assaults after they take place, but none for preventing them.

Each approach did a good job of summarizing what had been suggested and discussed during each approach, and the summary not only recapped the deliberation, but tied it all together and put it towards the invention of a solution to the problem of sexual violence. I was highly impressed by the fluidity of this deliberation and wish it had happened before my own so I could have taken note of some helpful tips including how to moderate, where to situate ourselves, location, and preparedness. They did a good job, and we did too. I am impressed by the outcomes of both this deliberation and my own.

Malcolm X’s rationale for the creation of the Organization of Afro American Unity was to unite all people of African descent, in both the western and eastern hemispheres, with the aim to eventually merge the two. Malcolm implies that African Americans living in the United States would join Africans on the continent of Africa eventually. This is because he acknowledges the lack of freedom, justice, and equality for African Americans in the United States, a place supposedly founded upon the principles of freedom, justice, and equality. He wants to take people to a place where they can control their own destiny. During his travels in Africa, Malcolm X witnessed the success of the creation of such organizations in Africa and was inspired to establish one in the United States.

Malcolm X unites the words “self-preservation” and “self-defense.” Self-defense is not an offensive move; it is to defend your life, nothing more. Malcolm X feels that because the government, law enforcement officials, and neighbors will not look out for the African American community, African Americans need to take advantage of their Second Amendment rights and protect themselves since no one else will. Furthermore, African Americans were and still are violently and hatefully targeted by many, so self-defense is the only natural course of action in order to counter the attacks and offenses.

Malcolm X’s take on the importance of education in the Civil Rights Movement is not to increase one’s worth in the eyes of others, but to increase one’s dignity and self-worth. It would seem that Malcolm X’s take on education is a form of intellectual and emotional self-defense. He cites the glaring inequalities of African American schools when compared to white schools and the cruciality of leveling the disparities in order to empower the children who were and still are being “criminally shortchanged in the public school system of America.”

As you may have noticed, I have not included my second draft. That is because I do not have one. I am having a hard time finding things from my first draft that I want to change, as unrealistic as that might sound. I want to have a recurring statement or theme, but I am having a hard time finding one that flows with what I have already written. When I wrote my first draft, it came so directly from my heart, I am almost hesitating about making changes. But I am very open to suggestions, thoughts, and change, so if you can think of anything I can do to improve my first draft, please let me know!

After much deliberation, I have decided that for my Civic Issues blog, I will discuss global education’s manifestations as a privilege or a right, the history of why it is  both or neither a privilege or a right, the current ramifications, and what can be done to ensure equal access to quality education across the globe in order to close the opportunity gap between the educated  and the uneducated.

I have decided that for my Passion Blog, I will focus on individuals in current events who are making a positive impact and difference on the world in one way or another. I will focus on their achievements, actions, character, and motivation. I will assess the positive difference their action, words, or decision made and the short and long-term effects. I hope to inspire others, and myself, by focusing on how compassionate humanity can be.

I believe in the healing power of a smile. I also believe that there is a physical and emotional disconnect between people today. We march swiftly down the street on or looking at our phones, electronic earplugs stuffed in our ears to keep out the world. Everyone needs personal space. It is nothing to be discarded or disrespected. But think of the people you pass on the street, the ones without phones or earplugs that are perhaps having a sad, lonely day. They search your downturned face for a flash of life, humanity, or compassion. Think of the things you miss when you look at the ground or at your phone. Think of the things you would experience if you opened your ears to listen, your eyes to connect, your mouth to smile.

I left for Morocco late in the summer before my senior year of high school. I arrived not knowing a word of Arabic. I walked the same route to school every day, and was so fascinated, I pocketed my phone and watched, wide-eyed, my surroundings. I soon realized that I passed the same people every day in the same place. Most of these people were sitting on cardboard on the ground, their eyes searching those who pass, their hands stretched upward. These people were in need of many things including food, money, and medicine. But I truly believe that they needed, above all, an acknowledgement of their existence as human beings.

I handed out coin after coin on my walks to school, but never really felt like I was making a difference. It was then that I realized that these people were spending their days reaching out to people and waiting for someone to reach back. They put themselves in the path of a fast-paced world, most bravely, most vulnerably, most beautifully.

So I slowed down. I made eye contact with them, and I smiled. Time passed, and soon I was seated on the ground with them, putting my newly learned and somewhat halting Arabic to work. I spent most of this time with a tiny woman who truly resembles Gandhi after his fast. We got to know each other. I laughed to hear her tell of antics of her children, and cried to learn why she sits on the street.

I lived in Morocco for a year, and spent a bit of time with this woman every day. One day, towards the end of the year, I was walking with my Moroccan host mother. We stopped at the woman’s spot on the street and I joyfully introduced them. They conversed for several minutes, and as we said goodbye, my host mother turned to me, her eyes misty, and said, “Emma, I wish you could hear what that woman has to say about you. You have changed her life.”

I believe in the healing power of a smile. In this case, the woman on the street healed me with her smiles. She taught me a lesson that all the spare change in the world cannot buy. To share with someone a bit of your time, your love, and your compassion is the greatest gift of all. Even a smile in passing tells them that you see them, that you recognize their worth as a person. The smile you receive in return tells you that you are seen, that your worth as a person has been recognized. I believe the world can be healed, one smile at a time.

 

I was thrilled to learn that we will be completing a “This I Believe” Project this semester in RCL II. I always enjoy listening to the stories people tell about what they believe in when I tune into NPR. I think it is a great way to get in touch with oneself in case one isn’t entirely sure what they believe in, and I think it is an enlightening way to learn about the lives of fellow human beings.

I am someone with strong, definite beliefs, so I feel like I could come up with several beliefs that I feel strongly enough about to write a story. I could discuss the importance of family and close friends in my life, I could talk about how life-changing immersive travel is, I could talk about the power of knowledge and education and why everyone deserves to be properly educated, or I could talk about the importance of being one with nature. I feel strongly about all of these ideas and so many more.

However, I have been meditating upon the question at hand, “This I Believe,” and I think I have settled upon the idea I would like to talk about. I believe in the power of a smile. I believe a smile says more to someone than many words could. I believe that to bestow a smile upon someone communicates to them not only warmth and love, but also that their existence is acknowledged, respected, and embraced. I have several past encounters during which a smile changed my life.

I would also like to take this opportunity to discuss some ideas for future Passion Blogs and Civic Life Blogs. My Passion Blog topic last semester was all about Morocco, a subject I feel I know much about because of my year spent there my senior year of high school. However, in the creation of the blog entries, I all but exhausted my supply of photographs from my time in Morocco, and I, very passionately indeed, said just about all I could say about Morocco. In conclusion, a new passion blog idea is needed. I think I would like to focus on something very positive, because we all need a dose of uplifting news every day, or in this case, once a week. I think I will write weekly about something heartwarming and inspiring that I learned or heard during that week. This will include current events worldwide.

As for the Civic Life Blogs, I think I would like to focus my efforts on the human condition across the globe. I would like to raise awareness about aspects humanitarian issues, past and present, that may not be well known. This way I will educate myself and hopefully those around me.

I look forward to sharing the future final products of all three ideas with you in the future! Thank you!

This semester truly flew by. It was  hectic and stressful, but also a wonderful learning experience. I learned the meaning of working hard and putting 100% effort into a task. I failed many times this semester, but those failures have propelled me forward by teaching me the right ways to succeed.

In Rhetoric and Civic Life, I was fortunate enough to have been given the opportunity to practice several crucial skills. These skills include rhetorical analysis and persuasion with the rhetorical analysis essay, public speaking with our speeches on an object or a person who has displayed effective rhetoric or civic engagement, research and analysis with our paradigm shift papers, engaging an audience with our TED talks, and finally, filming and editing with our history of a controversy videos. We have more than dappled in all of these subjects; a good amount of time was spent gaining knowledge, insight, and precision for each skill at hand.

I feel as though I have a strong foundation in all of these skills, but I want more practice. I want to always feel like I’ve done an excellent job on an assignment. I never want to doubt my work or be disappointed in myself. This happened twice this year with our two public speaking assignments, the speech and the TED talk. I practiced both for hours, but walked away dissatisfied after my performance on each. I would like to perfect my public speaking skills because it is truly something I enjoy, just not something I excel at yet.

Time is always a constraint on excellence. If I had all the time in the world, I am sure I would feel my work was excellent. Even if I had time enough to focus solely on this class, RCL, I think I would feel even better about my final products. However, my passion for and interest in the tasks we have been given this semester have powered my success in and enjoyment of the class.

I look greatly forward to next semester!

Thank you for reading my RCL blogs! Until next time…

I practiced my TED Talk for hours. I felt confident about how my performance would go. I am passionate about my topic, so I felt sure that my passion would motivate an excellent talk.

Upon arrival in the recording studio at the library, I asked to speak first. I stepped up front and was nearly blinded and scalded by the lights. The room was small and hot, and all these things seemed to throw me off. I began my talk and started strong, but grew hotter, more distracted, and more nervous as my talk progressed. Despite my hours of practice, while I got my point across in my talk, it did not go exactly as planned. When I had practiced it at home, my time was always around five minutes and five seconds, and that was right where I wanted it. However, as is visible above, during the actual presentation, I only spoke for about four minutes. I luckily made it over the minimum requirement, but not by much.

I tried to figure out why my time dropped by exactly one minute. After watching my recording a couple of times, I realized with great chagrin that I had left out two important sections and I had, of course, spoken far too quickly. Furthermore, there were two times during my talk when I lost my train of thought and forgot what came next. I had to pause uncomfortably in order to fish for the following thought. These pauses felt much more dragged out when I was standing at the front of the room than they actually were on the recording.

It is beyond frustrating that none of these mishaps ever occurred when I practiced on my own but during the presentation they all surfaced. I want to be above letting nerves get the better of me. More than practicing the words of my speech, I should practice deep breathing, thinking calming thoughts, speaking slowly, moving about less, and exuding an aurora of calm confidence. My mother has always told me to imagine a positive outcome. For example, if you are about to run a race, focus and picture yourself winning the race. When it comes to giving talks, I will practice finishing the talk feeling like it could not have gone better.

 

The paradigm shift I decided to write about in my Paradigm Shift Paper is the change in the way that racism manifests itself in the United States since prior to the Modern Civil Rights Movement until today. In order to transform my lengthy Paradigm Shift Paper into a concise TED Talk, I will need to first and foremost cut down on length by filtering out much of what I wrote, leaving only what I deem to be most important. In order to make this happen, I may need to cut down on some, not all, but some of the dry facts I have in the paper. While they are relevant, important, and interesting, I need to be connecting with my audience by focusing less on preaching facts to them and more on engaging them by telling them why my paradigm shift is important, its present and future ramifications, and what the audience can do about it.

I would like to elaborate greatly on my conclusion. In my paper, I really used it just to wrap up my paper. However, for my TED Talk, I think that the conclusion is very important, perhaps the most important component of my paper, because it is what the audience will be left with after I’ve finished speaking. The conclusion should wrap up the talk, but it should also inform or remind the audience why the topic at hand is relevant and important, and what needs to be done about it.

My paper was a bit on the negative side because racism is neither a positive nor a light topic. However negative it may have sounded, it was extremely realistic and honest. However, in my TED Talk, I do not want to desolate my audience and dampen their day or week. I would like to, rather than downplay the negativity of the heavy topic at hand, play up the hopefulness of the chance for change. I would like to focus (in my conclusion) about how much of an impact we (my audience, the world, and I) can make in the elimination of racism in this country through the spread of awareness of its constant existence and severity. Using my TED Talk, I would like to instill a motivation, driven by hope, in my audience to change the way they think and to encourage others to do the same, thus engendering change and progressing towards the termination of racism and discrimination in our country.