Ted Talk Outline

USA-Russia Relations involved with Pop Culture

• Cold War Era
o Post World War II and 50s
 Animal Farm by George Orwell (1945)
 1984 by George Orwell (1949)
 Alas, Babylon by Pat Frank (1959)
 Between 1948 and 1953, 70 anti-communist films were produced
 Between 1946 and 1950, 45.6% of villains in Soviet films were American or British
o 60s
 “Daisy” Commercial 1964
 Rocky and Bullwinkle Show (’59-’64)
 The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (’64-’68)
 Art Wars. Russia owned ballet and chess. USA owned jazz and abstract expressionist paintings
o 70s
 1972 Gold Medal Basketball Game (1972)
 Flyers-Red Army Game (1976)
o 80s
 Miracle on Ice
 Apple “1984” Commercial (1983)
 Red Dawn (1984)
 Rocky IV (1985)
 WarGames (1983)
 Wendy’s “Soviet Fashion Show” Commercial (1985)
 Summer Olympics Boycotts of 1980 and 1984
 Glasnost
o Early 90s
 The Hunt for Red October (1990)
• Post Cold War Era
o 90s
 Massive decline in this type of media. Maybe related to tentative peace?
 Air Force One (1997)
o 00s
 Start to see some Cold War based media
 Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon (2001)
 Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
o 10s
 Throwback to Cold War era topics. Russia vs USA never seems to happen in modern times.
 Call of Duty: Black Ops (2010)
 Red Dawn (2012), switched enemies
 The Americans (2013)
 Salt (2010)
 Yulia Efimova, Rio Olympics 2016

Paradigm Shift Outline: USA-Russian Relations

•Introduction
o Paradigm Shift
o Rivalry between U.S. and Russia
•Cold War Relations
o Nuclear Arms race
o Hemispheric influence
o Vietnam
o Korean War
o Afghanistan
o Cuban Missile Crisis
o U-2 incident
•Fall of the USSR
o Glasnost
o Poland’s 1989 election
o Fall of Berlin Wall
o Coup against Gorbachev
o December 1991, Collapse
•In pop culture
o The Americans
o Salt
o Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull
o Red Dawn
o Ivan Drago, Rocky IV
o 1984, Animal Farm by George Orwell
o The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show
o Wendy’s Commercial, Apple “1984” commercial
o Call of Duty: Black Ops
o Billy Joel “We Didn’t Start the Fire”
o The Hunt for Red October
o Ghost Recon
o “Daisy”
•In Sports
o USA vs Russia, Miracle on Ice
o Flyers vs Russia
o Summer Olympic Boycotts of 1980/1984
o Yulia Efimova, Rio 2016
•The 1990s, growing positive relations
o Yeltsin visits USA
o Washington Summit 1992
o Moscow Summit
o Helsinki Talks
o G-8 Summit
o ISS cooperation
•Lifestyle
o Good vs bad
o Constant fear
o Red Scare, McCarthyism
o Russian crackdowns
o “duck and cover” drills
o Air raid sirens, CONELRAD emergency broadcast stations
o Space Race
o JFK assassination
o Protesting, hippies
•Putin and G.W. Bush Era
o Missiles in Poland
o Generally postitive
•Obama and Putin Era
o Russian-Georgian Conflict
o North Korea nuclear threat
o Syria
o Reset
o July 2012, Fighters in Alaska
o Akula-class submarine scouting Gulf of Mexico
o February 12, Guam incident
o Snowden
o Ukraine and Crimea
•Current Events
o August 2016-now
 Marines being placed in Norway (possibly)
 47% of people think USA will start WWIII
 Russian television warns of coming nuclear war
 New nuclear drills taking place and defense exercises
 Russia orders officials and families to come home
 Russia considering bases in Cuba and Vietnam
 US army chief briefings
 Alleged hacking of US election
 Threats
 Suspension of nuclear agreements
 US blamed for attack on Russian Damascus embassy
 Russia bombed UN convoy
 US bombing of Syrian troops during ceasefire
•Peace
o Emergent shift becomes residual again
•War
o Emergent shift becomes dominant again
•Conclusion
o Active paradigm shift
o Wait and watch

Creating an Online Misconception

Social media, the place that seems like a fantasy land. Everyone is happy and everyone puts forward their best image. At least, that is how it appears. However, how close is the image we put forward related to how we feel in real life? That is truly the million-dollar question. For some people, their appearance on social media shows they are the happiest person in the world, but in reality… the case is quite the opposite. Madison Holleran may be the best know example of this.

I remember hearing about her two years ago. After hearing what everyone said about her, I thought to myself: “How can she be depressed. It’s like she had it all.” How do we know when we have it all though? Everyone’s goals and perspectives on life are different. For Madison Holleran, what she had wasn’t what it was made out to be.

Madison Holleran was a graduate of Northern Highlands in New Jersey. She was a member of two state championship winning soccer teams, state champion in track for the 800 meter, and considered an outstanding student. Her accomplishments earned her notice by Pennsylvania University, where she ultimately went to college and joined the track & field team. According to many people in her life, she was always happy and smiling. However, that changed her freshmen year of college. She wasn’t as happy and never smiled, even though her pictures on Instagram were different. On social media, she appeared happy and in control of her life; but, in reality, she was fighting a battle with depression. People thought she was okay as they looked at her photos; but had they seen her in person, they would have experienced something different. Madison thought her friends were happy as well, but they too were experiencing the same struggles she was.

In “The Circle” we see a similar situation with Annie. After her experience with PastPerfect and the truths she discovers about her past, Annie experiences crippling depression. To many, who only see her social media account, she is still the usual happy Annie. To Mae, Annie can’t recover, is not herself, and goes into a coma.

We can compare these events and their implications to our lives as well. Many people that you know may be putting a happy image up on social media, but they are truly feeling down. I know I have done it and I’m sure many of you who read this have done the same. People want to appear happy online and they want people to think they are okay. They want to put forward that false face.

I barely post online. I don’t find social media particularly interesting, as I feel people are fake online, and I constantly worry what people are thinking about me when they view my profile. I’m sure many of you agree that the best way to get to understand and know someone is through person-to-person interaction. Online profiles only give us a limited view into each other’s personality and interests. Online we can portray ourselves as who we want to be. For me, I could appear more outgoing and social, but in reality, I sit in my dorm all day and keep to myself. A positive aspect of social media is that you can be whoever you want to be online. However, that can turn into a negative as well. If people rely on social media to get to know you, then they never really know you. Or, people will think everything in life is going great for you because they are just using your online profile and the happy images you put forth. When, in fact, you could be contemplating the ways in which you want to end your life. Then people never know if you need help.

While social media has increased our ability to connect with people around us, we have to be careful about how much importance we place into it when we are judging how people feel. As they say, “The saddest people smile the brightest.” In some instances, the happiest online profiles could belong to the saddest people. Finally, if your friends or someone close to you appears to not be themselves, get them some help. Talk to them and let them open up to you. Sometimes, showing the slightest compassion can change someone’s life.

The Circle and a Paradigm Shift

keep-calmsm_bl

In “The Circle” by David Eggers, The Circle is a leading edge tech company. At The Circle, they developed new age technologies like SeeChange and PastPerfect. By leading from the forefront, The Circle causes a paradigm shift through the course of the novel. So what are the residual, dominant, and emerging ideologies?

The residual ideology is that of the older people who prefer to avoid newer technology. Just like we see it in our everyday lives, older people prefer not to use technology if they don’t have to. In the book, Mae’s parents and Mercer are in this group. They would prefer to just keep to themselves and use the same technology that they are used to, like cable television and radios. I’m sure that everyone who reads this knows of people like this in their lives. My grandparents are the same way. My uncle buys them all of these gadgets like Chromecast and Apple TV, but I’m the only one that ends up using it. The people in this group believe in staying away from the internet and just being able to keep to themselves. They value their privacy.

The dominant ideology is that of the older tech companies. The tech companies that are fighting a losing battle with The Circle. The people in this group could be Kalden and the government officials that come out against The Circle. They prefer a competition between tech companies and not one company controlling the internet. The Circle develops a monopoly of the internet. If you have ever taken an economics course, you know that monopolies are a bad thing. Competition is of the utmost importance. The people in this ideology believe in that competition and having free choice over what you would like to use. Today, we see this between companies such as Google, Microsoft, Sony, and Samsung. There is constant competition in markets. The people in this group are concerned that The Circle is going too far with their technology and it is reaching a point of danger. Most of the people in this group believe in a mix of privacy and openness in their lives. They’re more willing to share, but also see boundaries in what people should have access to.

The emerging ideology is that of The Circle. A company that pushes the tech industry to a new level and is attempting to grab power from everything. The Circle tries to form a monopoly over the internet so that everything must go through them. The people that belong to this group are Stenton, Bailey, and most of The Circle’s employees. They all believe that they’re going to come up with the next big and life-changing invention. The Circle is always pushing forward. As the plot progresses, you’ll see The Circle slowly start to become the dominant ideology. More people begin to follow and support the company as the novel progresses. If you don’t follow The Circle, then you’re crazy. It is like world domination. The people in this group believe that everyone should be open and share. Privacy and not sharing is a crime to them.

From the beginning of this book to the end, we slowly see changes take place. Slowly, the tech industry shifts from the emerging ideology to the dominant. The Circle comes to dominate the internet and information processing. You can’t do anything without The Circle being involved in some way or knowing. The beliefs of society slowly change as well. People become willing to share more information and believe less in the value of privacy. Will we see come to see this paradigm shift in reality?

A New Dilemma

nopic

In Robinson Meyer’s “Pics or It Didn’t Happen: The New Crisis of Connected Cameras,” the author takes a look into a recurring ethical issue we are faced with on a daily basis. That issue derives from a technological change in which more people now have access to cameras that are connected to the internet. For most of us, that is our cellular phone. But why has one tiny device with internet and a camera caused such a problem?

The problem, according to Meyer is the result of a paradigm shift in which people now have more access to content captured through our mobile devices. Pictures and videos taken from our cell phones can appear on the internet just a few minutes after being captured. Then, a wildfire starts in which that image has the potential to spread from site to site with no hope of being contained. Now we are faced with an issue in which we have not had to have a conversation about before: what should the public be able to view and what should they not be able to view?
Meyer’s main evidence of this ethical issue is the execution of American journalist James Foley by ISIS militants. Before the internet, the only way in which people would have been able to see the footage was through the news networks, the main media source for news. However, due to the changes in the internet and mobile devices, that footage can reach millions of people in a short period of time. Once the video was uploaded to YouTube by ISIS, it spread to everyone’s social media feeds and the link was shared. People were able to view a tragic incident in a way in which previous generations of American’s never could. An argument then developed over how much the public should be able to see it or whether it should be seen at all. YouTube took down the video and accounts were banned from Twitter, but the damage was already done. Millions of Americans had already seen the gruesome execution.

Meyer proceeds to ask us two questions: “What should we do about the new proliferation of cameras?” and “What should we do when the images they capture wind up on the internet?” In a time in which we can see so much with the push of a button, at what time do we finally cross the line? Meyer finally claims at the end of his article that we still don’t have an answer to these questions. Part of the answer is up to the individual, but each day we learn a little more about the possible answers to these questions.

In many ways we are faced with a similar dilemma in David Egger’s “The Circle.” The Circle has a policy in which they want people to share everything. That ranges from what they ate that day, to their interests, to how they spent their day. One instance in which this really shows up is when Mae goes kayaking. Afterwards, she gets into a ton of trouble for not have taken any pictures or videos of the event. To The Circle, that is the equivalent of the event never having happened. Mae has no physical proof she did it, so how do people know she isn’t just lying? It is very similar to circumstances we currently face today. Whenever someone sees a celebrity they must get a selfie… or it never happened. Your friends will just pass it off as a lie or exaggeration. Mae quickly learns that if she wants to remain at The Circle, she must film and capture everything just as Meyer points out in his title: “Pics or it didn’t happen.”

Their Finest Hour: An Analysis of Winston Churchill’s Greatest Speech

51zmn0l1ml-_sy300_

World War II had started horribly for the Entente, the Allied powers. German armor and infantry flooded across Europe in what became known as the “blitzkrieg” or “lightning war.” Countries were felled, one by one, in quick succession. The hope of Western Europe was left in the hands of France and the United Kingdom. However, there remained hope. France had the Maginot Line, the strongest stretch of fortifications every built, and together the French and British had a superior numerical advantage. Yet, the hope soon soured. The Germans rushed through Belgium, circumventing the Maginot Line, and pushed deep into France, cutting off thousands of French and British troops. The British were forced to enact Operation Dynamo and pulled off a daring evacuation of Dunkirk, rescuing almost 340,000 soldiers. The Entente clung to their remaining optimism… until Paris fell on June 14, 1940 and with it, the organized French resistance. The world was left in stunned silence. In just over a month, the Germans had managed to capture more ground than they had during the entirety of World War I. Seemingly, the only country left standing in the wake of Germany was the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom had thrown its troops onto the front-line and failed miserably, costing them 243 ships, 931 aircraft, and much of their mechanized ground forces because they were forced to abandon their vehicles and artillery. In this moment of history someone was needed: that man was Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Prime Minister Churchill was able to reignite hope in the faint hearts of his people when he delivered his “Their Finest Hour” speech on the 18th of June, 1940. Using his powerful oratorical skills and an appeal to peoples’ logic and emotions, Winston Churchill managed to give all of the United Kingdom hope in the coming fight.

No man was better suited to give this speech than Winston Churchill. He had lived a distinguished life, earned the respect of the people, and became the second powerful man in the United Kingdom. He was born on November 30, 1874 to Lord Randolph Churchill and Jeanette Jerome. When he came of age, Winston Churchill entered into the British Royal Military College graduating ranked 20th in his class of 130. Churchill joined the military at the height of the British Empire, serving time in India and the Sudan. After leaving the army in 1899, Churchill became a war correspondent for the Morning Post and was captured by the Boers during the Anglo-Boer War. He made headlines after he escaped and traveled to Portuguese-controlled Mozambique. Afterwards, Churchill followed in his father’s footsteps and became a politician. In 1908, he was finally elected to Parliament and appointed as president of the Board of Trade, a cabinet position of the prime minister. While in that position, Churchill introduced the first minimum wage, unemployment insurance, the eight-hour work day, and helped arrange for labor exchanges for the unemployed. Furthermore, he assisted in the passing of the People’s Budget, which enacted new taxes on the rich to pay for the new social programs. British workers heralded Churchill as champion of their cause. Subsequently, Churchill served as first lord of the Admiralty where he championed the modernization of the British Navy and setup the Royal Navy Air Service. For a brief period during World War I Churchill rejoined the British Army to fight on the Western Front. During the late 1930s, he proceeded to become a leading advocate for British rearmament and was a staunch critic of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement of Hitler. Then on September 3, 1939, Churchill was again appointed as first lord of the Admiralty and a member of the war cabinet and by April of 1940, he rose to chairman of the Military Coordinating Committee. Churchill finally rose to the height of power when he was appointed as prime minister on May 10, 1940 by King George VI. Winston Churchill had a distinguished career in the military and politics and earned the respect of the British people by championing their causes. By the time he spoke on June 18, 1940; no man had more credibility than Winston Churchill. In that dire situation, Winston Churchill was the right man to stand in front of the House of Commons and the British people and layout their situation.

Using his credibility, Winston Churchill was able to make a strong logical argument for why the United Kingdom would prevail. In the face of dissipating morale, Churchill was quick to bring up that fact that a dozen British divisions had fought along their French comrades and had been quite successful. Unfortunately, had it not been for the failings of French commanders, Churchill believed those forces would have been able to turn the tide. Churchill followed with the point that many of those forces were now safely home due to the evacuation of Dunkirk; making the remark: “…in this Island today [we have] a very large and powerful military force. This force comprises all our best-trained and our finest troops, including scores of thousands of those who have already measured their quality against the Germans and found themselves at no disadvantage.” Adding to that, Churchill pointed to the fact that a German invasion of England would be extremely difficult. With the number of troops and defense forces that the British had at home, their island was heavily defended. With their radar technology an invasion would be even more difficult. The British could have advanced warning beforehand and their powerful naval force and air force could make the German crossing of the English Channel a hassle. The time required for Germany to amass an invasion fleet was beneficial to the British as well. Looking at these factors together meant that England looked like a fortress. Since a naval invasion would be so difficult, Churchill turned his thoughts to the air. For those who questioned the United Kingdom’s air force, Churchill reputed their claims: “…we were accustomed to inflict in the air losses of as much as two and two-and-a-half to one. In the fighting over Dunkirk, which was a sort of no-man’s-land, we undoubtedly beat the German Air Force, and gained the mastery of the local air, inflicting here a loss of three or four to one day after day.” Churchill considered that figure could be even higher when fighting over home territory. Finally, Churchill ensured the British people they were not alone. The United Kingdom had been promised support by their former colonies which included Canada, Australia, South Africa, and New Zealand and supplies from the United States. Great Britain had a great chance to come out of this fight in one piece.

If Winston Churchill’s logical appeal was not strong enough to rally everyone for the fight, his use of pathos was. One of the strongest appeals that Churchill makes is through a comparison to World War I. He stated, “During the first four years of the last war the Allies experienced nothing but disaster and disappointment. That was our constant fear: one blow after another, terrible losses, frightful dangers. Everything miscarried.” Even after all the horrors, the allies managed to come out as the victors. This comparison showed citizens that even though things seem bad now, in a similar situation 30 years ago the allies still managed to win. It means there is always hope. In order to generate more enthusiasm from the people, Churchill points to the death and suffering of the British army and that of conquered people such as the Czechs, Poles, Norwegians, Dutch, Belgians, and French. If these people are already suffering at the hands of the despotic Hitler, then why should the British people not keep fighting? The British people have a duty not just to themselves and their country, but to those they promised protection too. Churchill even turns the war into a fight of good versus evil and light versus dark with his use of terms like “sunlit uplands” and “despotic control.” There are few arguments that connect better than being the light against the darkness. The epitome of this argument in Churchill’s speech is: “Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilization. Upon it depends our own British life, and the long continuity of our institutions and our Empire… If we can stand up to [Hitler], all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age…” The argument made with this quote is powerful. This isn’t just any war, this is a war about survival of culture and goodness. If the British give in, they will lose everything they have created and everything they love. The survivors would be subjected to a dark new world. This creates a deep fear of losing and an intense burning within to never give up, because even if you survive… you will not want to live in a world controlled by the Nazi’s.

“Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years,” Churchill cried, ”men will still say, ‘This was their finest hour.’” A powerful and hopeful ending to an imperative speech. In a dire time of need, Winston Churchill stepped up and made a strong appeal to his nation to stand strong and be proud. He urged them to do their duty and keep their hope up. The true power of the speech lays into what happened afterward. The same day as this speech, Charles de Gaulle, the French general, made his famous appeal to the French people to keep fighting. Churchill even foreshadowed the coming battle stating, “What General Weygand called the Battle of France is over. I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin.” And the Battle of Britain began just three weeks later. During the hard times of the Battle of Britain, this speech showed its staying power by holding British morale together. They knew what they were fighting for and that the hope of much of the world laid on their shoulders. Using that strength, they managed to outlast the Germans repeated bombardments and, ultimately, won the skies over their home. Five years later, the British and their allies had won the war. Europe was free again and the darkness that had threatened the world was pushed back into the breach from which it came. Winston Churchill’s words had a powerful effect on its audience and he delivered it when they needed it most. Therefore, “Their Finest Hour” is one of the greatest speeches ever.