The book “Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right” was written by Sociology Professor Arlie Russell Hochschild of the University of California Berkeley. For the book, Professor Hochschild occasionally traveled to southwestern Louisiana ten times from 2011-2016 to learn about Republican voters and members of the Tea Party. Her book is based off her understandings of the 60 people from the region that she interviewed. To summarize Professor Hochschild, the reason for her traveling to Louisiana was to cross an empathy wall and better understand Republican voters and why they voted the way they do. I think the quote “In 1960, when a survey asked American adults whether it would “disturb” them if their child married a member of the other political party, no more than 5 percent of either party answered “yes.” But in 2010, 33 percent of Democrats and 40 percent of Republicans answered “yes.” In fact, partyism, as some call it, now beats race as the source of divisive prejudice.” Best explains her primary reasoning for writing this book (6). Professor Hochschild wanted to examine the other side of the political spectrum from a sociologist’s point of view to figure out what was going on. She understood her party, but she was struggling to understand the other party. By “seeing over the empathy wall,” she hoped to bridge some of that divide.

The book is broken into four distinct parts and three appendixes. The first part focuses on what Professor Hochschild calls the “Great Paradox.” Louisiana as a state ranks 48th in eighth-grade reading, 49th in math, and ranked last in overall health. Yet, the people of the state constantly want smaller government. The second part focuses on the social area of the people and investigates how businesses, state government, the media, and church affects their lives. Professor Hochschild attempts to really understand what influenced their beliefs. Part three is about the “deep story” of the people of Louisiana. She divides the people into four different categories – team player, worshipper, cowboy, and the rebel – and tries to delve into what drives the different types of individuals she encounters. She wanted to understand how each of these different categories viewed the world and different elements like race, gender, discrimination, and pride. Part four compares the 1860s to the 1960s and looks into the future. At the end, Professor Hochschild looked into then presidential candidate Donald Trump and examined why individuals were supporting him. Appendix A describes Professor Hochschild’s research, while B covers the relationship with pollution and politics, and C covers fact-checking.

According to Professor Hochschild, this book is described by sociologists as an “exploratory” or “hypothesis generating” type of research. Her goal was to discover merely what was going on with Republicans. What was their drivers and influences? How did their beliefs developed? How did their beliefs play out in their daily lives? She wasn’t looking to figure out how common or rare different views were or explicitly study the views. In order to do her research, Professor Hochschild created four focus groups (two Republican and two Democrat) and followed around different members of the community – talking to them and observing their actions. The book doesn’t focus on making arguments for one side or another (though she does like to attempt to reason thought processes out and look at some paradoxes she sees), but focuses on exploring the people she interviews and encounters in Louisiana. The tone of the book is definitely one of someone that seeks understanding, sometimes feels pity for the people she encounters, and sometimes in some ways condescending. Condescending in the way that sometimes these people don’t seem rational to her and she really wants to change their mind and lifestyle.

The book could influence social life by allowing people on left-of-center on the political spectrum to see into the lives of some of the people on the right. We often see someone’s views, but we don’t see how they developed those views. Understanding what motivates people and what causes them to act as they do closes some of the gap between groups. In some ways, I think Professor Hochschild actually understood these people and in some ways I think her reasoning or conclusions were off. I also disagree with her methods for gathering evidence for the book. Professor Hochschild uses one specific area of people to almost try and explain an entire voting group. Why did she choose Louisiana? It’s a very poor and poorly educated area. The Republican party has many different groups within it with many different views. She could have easily gone to northern California where residents wish to break away from California and create “The State of Jefferson,” or wheat country, or dairy country. The views between the areas are similar but different. She would have found much of the same religious influence in views but different views on the energy sector. Here in rural Pennsylvania we love the environment and love to hunt and fish (we get days off of school for hunting season) and if an oil company or coal company was putting that at risk, steps would be taken by the community to do something. I also dislike when Professor Hochschild makes a statement about conservative views, but doesn’t actually understand why we have those views. Let me show you a few examples. On page 7, Professor Hochschild tries to explain how the gap between the parties has widened because the right has moved farther right. I disagree with that assessment, but disagree more with her evidence. She references Republicans voting to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and sell non-federal lands. Republicans voted to do so because the IRS was weaponized against Tea Party groups, groups she talked to, and because many Republicans are tired of the federal government constantly claiming more land for itself even when local residents didn’t want them to. She even discussed how taxes on the rich were 91% under President Eisenhower, but fails to mention that due to the number of loop-holes the rich never paid more than 50% in taxes. She also makes observations like “The grass around the whites’ graves had been recently trimmed while that around the black graves had not” (20). Maybe the maintenance people hadn’t gotten there yet or she is just reaffirming a preconceived conception and the grass just looked like there was a difference. Moments like this make the book hard to read. I felt throughout the book that Professor Hochschild just reinforced stereotypes and misconceptions by the area she chose to study and the observations she would routinely make.

The books intended audience is definitely targeted towards people who identify as Democratic or have views left-of-center. If you wish to understand Republican voters better then read this, but I say that with a grain of salt. This book doesn’t do a great job of actually helping people climb over the “empathy wall,” but may actually reinforce their views of Republicans. From many comments that I have read, that seems to be exactly what is happening for many. If you read it, perhaps talk to a Republican or tea party member. Go ahead and ask me a question and I will explain why I believe what I do and what influenced that view. Overall, I feel this book does little to nothing to mend the divide between left and right.

Hochschild, Arlie Russell. Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right. New York: New, 2016. e-book.

Introduction

The purpose that Thomas and I set out with was to better inform people about the stereotypes and misconceptions around video games and also show them the impact that video games are playing on society. Video games have developed into a premier form of entertainment that increasingly appears in popular culture. It is important that people are informed about them and what they mean to people that are involved with them. Our audience was people that play video games and people that do not play video games but maybe know people that do. Even people that are interested in buying a console or personal computer to play video games are targeted by our website. I think Thomas and I have done a good job of reaching people in ways to persuade them. A huge percent of the population uses the internet, so we can reach a wide audience. We then use our website to give information and take down some stereotypes and misconceptions, perhaps opening the gates into video games for more people. There are probably girls out there who don’t play video games online because they think it would just be a bunch of guys. Now they know there are many girls that play and they will probably find other girls online to play with. We also show students and parents there are careers and jobs for people in the video game industry. You can have a successful life building them or playing them.

A website was probably the best way to reach our audience. A big thing about video games today is the online platform. As Thomas pointed out, online gaming has allowed people from all over the world to connect. We can use the internet to connect our website to people and give them information they have never seen. We can persuade them to try something new or take a new step in their lives.

We have put much thought into our design. I think the use of darker colors looks more professional and inviting at the same time. Some of our graphics are info heavy but others look fun and inviting. When I imagine video games, I imagine myself happy and having fun. I think our website does a good job of giving that feeling with also a professional look.

I think we do come across as authoritative and persuasive. We supply accurate information, give definitions for people who might not know much about video games, and reinforce our information with links to our sources and info-graphics. When I imagine leading gaming websites, I feel like ours would fit right in. I think the more professional look helps give us credibility.

Figuring out which types of infographics to use wasn’t too hard. I have two images taken from articles in my introduction. I had never thought about doing that before but it works out extremely well. Instead of just having readers see the headlines from the news, they can actually see the headlines. Then I can talk about them. Then I mainly used bar graphs to compare figures. 3 of the graphs were in my section on how social people are when playing video games. It showed various comparisons between girls and boys and how they interact with others. The clear theme was boys tend to play games more and be more social when doing it. Honestly, I think the most interesting infographic was my figure on the growth of tournament prize money in eSports. It is crazy that prize money grew from 37 million to almost 97 million in a matter of 2 years from 2014 to 2016. The electronic sports market is growing, which means there is going to be more opportunities in the future. Overall, I think my infographics do a great job of supplementing the information given through my brief. They allow people to better visualize what I am telling them.

Video Games Final Draft (PDF)-29g84ra

For my project, I was considering doing my project on video games. Something that isn’t necessarily a big issue, but a project I can have fun with. I can look at the benefits of video games and maybe some misconceptions. Do video games really make people more violent? Something I can perhaps answer. If that project doesn’t work, I was considering a second option on judicial activism. Judicial activism is when judges go beyond their powers and legislate from the bench. I plan and researching the history and key cases in which judicial powers have expanded. Then I can look at modern cases and maybe show why this is dangerous. The separation of powers and checks-and-balances were designed for a reason and the judicial branch is slowly siphoning power from the legislative and executive branches. The judicial branch was once considered the weakest branch and one day it could become the most powerful…

IssueGuideDraft-19o4qt9

Ever since Bedtime Stories came out in 2008, my high school class’s song had been “Don’t Stop Believin’” by Journey. I never understood what is was that I wasn’t supposed to stop believing in. Should I not stop believing in my dreams or in magic. In time, I realized that too me the song meant I should never stop believing in myself. In life, I would face challenges and obstacles, but I would need to believe in myself to get through it. I would need to have confidence in the decisions I made and follow through with them.

In my mind, the epitome of this belief was an event that took place on March 23, 2016.

My baseball team was in a district playoff game. It was the seventh inning and I was standing on first base with a chance to score the game winning run and, in the process, help us continue towards our goal of achieving a third straight district championship appearance. Our batter was given the sign to sacrifice bunt, which meant I was to only run to second when I saw that ball hit the ground. The batter fouled off the first pitch. Then as I watched the coach giving signals again, I realized that I had a tremendous opportunity. The pitcher, in order to avoid the bunt, would most likely throw an off-speed pitch or throw it in a bad spot to throw off the batter. I made a decision – I was going to steal second on my own accord.

3.6 seconds. That is the time it would take for me to steal second, but would it be fast enough. The pitcher was their ace, their catcher had already made our lives on the base paths difficult, and I was making a decision without my coach’s orders. All I had was the confidence that I would do it. When that pitcher lifted his foot, I took off with absolutely clarity. 3 second later and I was watching in slow-motion as my foot slid under the second baseman’s glove.

Safe!

With that steal I had changed the game. Our batter was then able to bunt down third, moved me up, and managed to beat out the play at first. A few pitches later and I jogged across home on a passed ball, scoring the winning run.

Had I not believed in myself and my abilities, I may have never attempted that steal. Maybe they would have kept us from scoring and won the game themselves, maybe not. However, I have tried to believe in myself when it comes to anything I do. As Yoda says in Star Wars, “Do or do not. There is no try.” If you believe in yourself, you can succeed. We can all accomplish the unimaginable as long as we avoid doubting ourselves. That is why I believe in the importance of believing in yourself.

Hey everyone, it looks like 2017 is here. That means it is the start of my second semester at Penn State. Hopefully it’s a good one. Now lets get down to business.

First-off, for my “This I believe” podcast I was considering two topics. The first is about never quitting. With it I could talk about my experience my senior season of basketball or I might even consider talking about my baseball career. I’m sure they would be interesting. I might be able to come up with some other possible stories to wrap my point around, but as for now I’m still working on those other possibilities. The sports stories just fly at me though. My second idea was about the power of being positive, which is something I talked about during my graduation speech. The fact is that when we doubt ourselves and think negatively, we will usually get the outcome we didn’t want but we seemingly expected. If we believe in ourselves we can accomplish almost everything we ever dreamed of. I know it sounds cliche, but it really is true. I have been through it and I still experience it here and there, but I’m really starting to take my advice and it helps. What you think of yourself is what you’ll get in life.

Now on to my passion blog. I would really like your thoughts on this one. I thought my film blog was pretty good and I honestly thought I was getting somewhere with it. I think that with every post, my blog kept improving. Maybe some of my past readers have some tips to keep it progressing. I would be more than happy to listen to your feedback and see what I can do moving forward. I also have to admit, I liked having an excuse to watch a movie every week. My other thought was maybe writing about video games. Someone in our class had that type of blog last semester and they may continue it, but it is still a possibility. I don’t know if anyone will really enjoy reading it though. While I may enjoy writing about my experiences with Mass Effect, Total War, or Counter-Strike: Global Offensive and other games, I don’t think anyone else will.

Finally, on to my upcoming civics issues blog. I was thinking either discussing foreign policy or perhaps climate change. I enjoy thinking about foreign policy, and I believe that I have a pretty strong grasp of what is going on and the effects of events and how connections between groups and countries work. That is my opinion, but some may disagree. There are many great topics to discuss including: the changes Turkey is experiencing, the rise of Chinese influence, and the changing nuclear landscape. My other consideration would be a topic of climate change. I admit, I am a skeptic. While I believe in protecting the environment against pollution, I don’t believe humans really affect climate as much as some scientists and officials claim. In the health and medical sector, when a company gets caught tampering with a study, they suffer a severe loss in their reputation and people send research projects and grants to other companies, hospitals, or institutions. With climate change, when a group has gotten caught tampering with the numbers, it has gone largely ignored and nothing gets done about it. We also always hear claims that scientists have come to a consensus on climate change, but that isn’t the reality. Many scientists are against the notion or are toeing the line on the subject. I’m sure a great discussion could be had on this subject. By the way, don’t worry, I am completely reasonable and will listen to all sides and make an attempt to understand the position and reasoning of others. I also prefer polite conversations than strong debates which tend to turn into total debacles.

This project was definitely very different. In the past when doing group projects, I have usually spent much of the time working with the group together. This project ended up being different. We each had our own roles and had to get the job done. It’s hard for all six of us to edit a video, so Haseeb and I were to do that. Another thing that was different for me was the group dynamics. In the past when working on a group project, I usually had to take the lead and make sure everything was getting done and people weren’t being lazy. This time it was completely different. There wasn’t really any one leader and we all tried our best to get the project done. I enjoyed doing a project in a different medium. Usually, I would do projects for an English class through the use of PowerPoint or a Word document. Making a video was new. It was fun to try something different. What I didn’t like was that I wasn’t as big of a part of this project as I usually am in working with a group. Haseeb had the video on his laptop, so the only time I could work on it was when he and I were both free. On the flip side, he could work on editing whenever he felt like it. I tried my best to put in feedback and worked to improve the video. I wrote some dialogue and did what ever I could to do my part. My favorite section of the video is the “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” section. I found it quite humorous. In my opinion, I think the final few sentences could have been messed with a little more. I just feel the ending didn’t sound right, but maybe that’s because I wrote that part. I’m usually a lot more tough on my own work. Everyone else thought it was fine, so maybe I just need to not worry about it. In the end, it was nice to just do something new and work with some new people. I think our hard work showed in the video.