Category: Civic Issues Blog

If you’ve ever taken a world history class, you know that the idea of democracy is relatively new. In fact, the very notion of individual liberties or the common good, as seen in democratic and collectivist cultures respectively, stemmed from a more traditional idea of power, based on lineage or seizing of a throne. Monarchies were present in many European countries before continental America was “discovered.” Regular citizens of a particular country or town were unlikely to challenge someone’s royal status, which was often passed down generationally and based on the luck of blood relations alone.

Without a moral code or clear direction in mind, especially in their early stages, positions of authority were heavily abused by those who were lucky enough to inherit them. In the process of gaining absolute, or even “divine” power, some rulers opted to impose a stricter set of rules that were arguably more beneficial to them individually than anyone else. A famous example of this was King Louis XVI and his wife, Marie Antoinette, who prompted the French Revolution by refusing to do anything about French citizen’s extreme poverty, while living a lavish lifestyle cooped up in their fancy castle.

Abuses of power include, but are not limited to, censorship of the press, giving special treatment to a few while ignoring the masses or a certain group, hoarding resources for oneself, not allowing civil liberties such as access to the internet or leisure time, and essentially acting on a whim without any sort of constitution or guidance. When these factors come into play, and there are no outside governing bodies to prevent it, monarchy quickly morphs into a Dictatorship. These rulers often play a political game to keep from being overthrown by any means necessary; through censorship, propaganda, forcing votes, and threats of severe punishment or death should they be challenged.

It is important to keep in mind that many of these countries have since modified their governments to give more weight to democratic systems, such as Parliament in the U.K. Parliament has actually been around since 1215, but it was not required for a ruler to consult both houses of Parliament when drafting a new law until 1414 when Henry V assumed the throne. Even still, the final decision was up to the ruler. It was not until 1928 that both men and women had the right to vote through the Representation of the People Act, and the country as a whole was then considered to be democratic in nature.

As of 2019, there were about 42 monarchies, most of which are currently at least semi-democratic, in the sense that they also have a Constitution-like document, a Prime Minister or President, and some other governing body like Parliament. These are deemed Constitutional Monarchies, Semi-Constitutional Monarchies, and Commonwealth Realms (Constitutional Monarchies that are also part of a union). Countries include the U.K., Canada, Australia, and Japan.

Additionally, there are still 7 absolute monarchies where the ruler has all of the power unquestionably. These countries include Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Brunei. In Saudi Arabia, Shariah Law, or Islamic practices, are treated as the formal statures for behavioral standards of citizens. Punishments for disobedience include public beheadings, stoning, or lashing.

As of 2020, there are currently close to 50 dictatorships, with an absolute ruler and minimal freedom. These countries include Russia, North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. North Korea is among the strictest and most brutal, severely limiting access to personal belongings, internet access, and leisure time. Conscription into the military is mandatory for all men aged 15 through age 30, and is selectively required for some women as well. Additionally, if you are born and raised in North Korea you are generally not allowed to leave the country, even just to travel. There are also many rules about outsiders visiting the country, and visitors are generally advised not to do so, because the threat level is so high.

As Americans, it is our job to be aware of the state of our world, even in regards to countries whose approach to government may be wildly different from ours. It is not productive to judge these nations based on their political practices, rather, we should learn what we can from the way they operate. What is the value of our freedom? How might we relate to these individuals and accept them into our communities should they visit or move here? Do we share core values such as religion, dedication to a cause, or a belief that despite our circumstances, things can get better?

It is easy to believe we are superior, unique, or non-traditional, and other countries simply have some catching up to do, but it is unlikely that an individual born and raised in such a society would think the same way. I ask all of you as readers to simply be aware of these differences (and similarities) when speaking to someone new. Globalization is upon us, if not in reality, through the media and other outside sources. Let’s arm ourselves and be prepared for the future, wherever it may lead us. Thank you so much for reading this post, and until next time (:

As much as I would like to cover the Coronavirus, I feel it is the obvious choice and will probably be covered extensively in the coming weeks by both individuals in this class and elsewhere. That being said, I am still interested in the health and well-being of individuals, and as a psychology major, I tend to like to focus on mental health.

One thing I don’t think is talked about enough is childhood trauma, especially as it pertains to familial structures. I feel there is a lack of support from the surrounding community, the government, and other legal systems in regards to extracting individuals from these potentially life-threatening or psychologically damaging situations, especially for minors who have no say in the matter. I think the cause of this is mostly inadvertent and mechanical. People often turn a blind eye to these issues unintentionally because they don’t want to interfere, they believe it isn’t their place, or they don’t know how to help. The mechanical aspect comes in when the criminal justice system remains biased an inconsistent from case to case and judge to judge.

This topic is close to my heart, as I was raised in a tumultuous and emotionally manipulative and abusive household, with threats of violence and little sense of stability. Due to this, it took many years for me to get my mental health under control, resulting in alternating anxiety and depression that affects me at times to this day, even though many of my previous stressors have been eliminated for quite some time. There are many people who have it way worse than I did, with regular physical abuse or extreme neglect.

Therefore, I would like my issue brief to center on policies that enact more avenues for easier access to resources for families, especially minors, without the interference of other authority figures unless the family opts for this, or it is a dire emergency. This could be done on a local level, in schools where teachers inform their students that they can ask for help, or even at a school assembly where common threats are discussed, and then children are asked to come forward at a later time if they are dealing with these issues and would like counseling or other resources. Each school could be required to set aside a few hours on a particular day, perhaps inviting a speaker who is also a mental health professional. This would serve as a capacity builder, educating both school faculty and children on what to look for in their own home or among their peers.

As for the mechanical issues with the criminal justice system, more care needs to be taken to base the decision not just on those 18 and older, but all individuals involved. In my opinion, as soon as you are willing and able to offer your voice to a discussion, you should have that right, and that includes standing in trial if need be. Also, judges that handle familial cases should all be on the same page. They should be placing the needs and safety of children before the “right for parental visitation.” For these issues to be addressed, there would need to be major system changes.

I hope I’ll be able to do this issue justice. It’s really important to me, so I’m willing to put in the research and the time and energy necessary (:

 

 

On Sunday, March 1st, from 3 to 4:30 pm and 5 to 6:30 pm respectively, I attended two deliberations. The first was my group’s deliberation, entitled Babies “R” Us, which focused on the moral, economic, and safety concerns that come with the genetic modification of an unborn child. This procedure can be done in order to prevent genetic disorders, or to alter genes that code for favorable traits such as intelligence, strength, or appearance. The second deliberation was entitled Sentenced to Rehabilitation, and focused on providing prisoners with the resources they need to not only serve their sentence, but improve as people, so they are better able to reintegrate into society after their release.

I’m not going to lie, initially I was a bit worried that our deliberation wouldn’t be as amazing as it turned out to be. We all seemed enthusiastic about our topic, but I wasn’t sure if the formalities of the event would bog down our ability to speak openly about the issue. However, the three approaches went phenomenally well, everyone was given a change to speak, and I think almost everyone in the room spoke at least once. Even further, everyone seemed to bounce ideas off each other in such a way that the conversation built and unfolded naturally. Our consideration of other’s ideas and our respect for each other as people really shined through. It was evident that we had known each other a while prior to this, as the rapport that had built up over the last semester really seemed to pay off. Even those who attended our deliberation that were not a part of our class fit right into the group dynamic, which was pretty cool to see.

Beyond the social aspects, our analytic process was also intelligently formulated, and I can see now why a deliberation with such extensive preparation is extremely valuable. As for creating an information base, team overview (go my team!!) allowed anyone who wanted to share a personal stake to do so, and it was awesome to learn more about people I had already grown close to as it pertained to this issue. The approaches also did an amazing job providing background and questions to facilitate the conversation. Early on, we established that most of the group favored allowing parents the option to genetically modify their children to prevent genetic disorders. This was originally supposed to be the basis for the entire discussion, but because that was the best decision possible in our eyes, we were able to move on to discussing how that policy would be put in place, and whether cosmetic modification should be an option. It was in weighing these pros and cons that I believe we shined the most.

Not only were we able to discuss safety and economic divides, but we were able to reimagine a hypothetical world where unbound genetic modification is a reality. By magnifying the idea so closely in our minds, the pros and cons became much more obvious. While we didn’t reach a final consensus on these further issues, I feel we definitely further educated ourselves by pushing the boundaries of our current ideas. Overall, I am so proud of our efforts as a group and proud that my tendency to remain silent in large, formal social situations did not prevent me from speaking multiple times (: Also, shout out to the bioethics professor, how cool is it that we were able to touch on so many professional topics in lay person terms?

As for the second deliberation, I thought it was nice that they went around in a circle at the beginning and gave everyone a chance to state their personal stake. I’ll admit I didn’t talk much during this deliberation but it gave me a chance to take notes and really listen to what was being said. The juxtaposition between ideas in this deliberation was much stronger than in our deliberation, particularly when discussing giving prisoners the right to vote. While it seemed the majority of the group was for this idea, a few individuals introduced some pretty convincing cons as well. Everyone managed to handle this in an extremely professional way, and I think a bit of backlash was just what this discussion needed to get everyone talking even more. As for education and mental health rehabilitation, everyone seemed to be on the same page about its importance for prisoners, so this discussion was more focused on resource management.

Overall, I had an amazing time at both deliberations. Two in a row, in hindsight, may have fried my brain a little, but in a good way. I’m definitely thankful for this opportunity, as I’ll be much more confident returning to this formal discussion setting in the future thanks to this experience. It also made me feel super professional and smart, and reiterated that our class is just that (: And that’s a wrap.

Recognizing that all I am about to say is purely speculation from the outside, today I will be attempting to cover countries where the overarching theme is collectivism, or in other words, where government officials (and oftentimes individual citizens as well) make most of their decisions based on what has been decided to be the “common good” as opposed to emphasizing individual liberties (as we saw with the U.S. last week). Here is a summary of collectivism if you want additional definitions. 

These cultures tend to focus a lot on community building, unity, togetherness, morals and values, upholding tradition, and honoring family, work, and friend dynamics. It’s not to say that other cultures don’t also engage in these acts everyday, but in countries like China, Japan, Brazil, and India, the desire to be there for others in a time of need, even if it means dangerously high levels of self-negligence, is especially prominent.

There are definite upsides to this notion. For many individuals living in collectivist cultures, family comes first. You don’t miss a monumental life milestone for a loved one, even extended family. It is considered extremely rude, immoral, and even dishonorable. Children in these family dynamics are supported well into adulthood, and these same children will take in elderly family members when they can no longer take care of themselves, no questions asked.

In the same way, any organized group to which a person subscribes will become a part of them, they will absorb it fully and they will present themselves as a collective “we” as opposed to a singular “I.” When friendly competition presents itself, the performance of any single individual will reflect the group as a whole, so there is often at least twice as much pressure to perform well. This can lead to much higher levels of achievement if the individual can rise to the occasion. In case you’re curious, here is a write-up about some key differences between Japan and the U.S.’ education system (spoiler alert, both are prestigious, but Japan’s is much more vigorous and selective).  

There are many joys that living for others can bring you, but there are inevitably some bumps along the way. A strong sense of self and an adequate self-esteem is often viewed as a necessity before helping others effectively can be achieved. With that in mind, let’s examine some of the potential pitfalls of a collective society:

Neglect of self, whether intentional or unintentional, can lead to complications when traumatic experiences leave an impact that an individual cannot process without asking for help. Mental disorders are often viewed as a personal weakness that is shameful and should simply be self-assessed or repressed, but that is not always enough to adequately treat these issues. High levels of outside pressure mixed with an inability to let off stream is a recipe for disaster, and can lead to higher levels of anxiety, depression, and higher suicide rates. Here is a mental health statistics website broken up by country. 

Inequity in workplace/social/political dynamics are also tolerated more readily due to the fact that little value is placed on the self. If you are a sweatshop worker in China, for example, you may feel at times you are fatigued and overworked, but it is unlikely that you will rebel against a system that an outsider (like us) would deem unethical because from a collectivist viewpoint, your job is to assist society, not rise the ranks yourself. You may even view your role, no matter how insignificant, as honorable and treat it as your duty to uphold this role to the best of your ability. This website shows that power distance is especially high in China, yet self indulgence and individualism is extremely low. (I’ve also included links to the other country’s pages above).

And finally, in collectivist cultures, individual pleasures are often viewed as a waste of time. While they are not forbidden and people certainly do have fun, someone from a collectivist culture is unlikely to brag about a wild night out, especially to their superiors. Leisure activities are more prominent in some of these cultures than others, but they are generally not emphasized nearly as heavily as a person’s ability to contribute productively to society.

We should strive, as Americans, who may seem to be the antithesis to this worldview, to learn from and pick up on certain nuances from these cultures. While we are unlikely to put down our pride and our passion to change the world with our own “superior” ideas, we could learn a thing or two about being there for loved ones, showing that we care, and taking up selfless projects from time to time. Chances are, it’ll make us feel a lot better about the other 99% of the time when we choose to be greedy (stereotypes galore, but you get my point). I hope you enjoyed this week’s post (: and as always, until next time.

As many of us are well aware, society is becoming much more global, connected, and therefore influenced by other cultures and ways of life. This is due, in part, to technology, immigration and travel, and an increased curiosity globally about how others choose to live, how governments choose to operate, and how effective these strategies are. In my civic issues blog, I would like to focus on global relationships. To do so, each post, I will be grouping similar countries together and discussing their political, social, and economic structures, analyzing what’s working and what could be improved. As these blog posts are fairly short, I’ll try to make my snapshots as accurate and thorough as possible, though I’ll undoubtedly miss a few important things along the way, and that’s ok. Here is an interesting article about the pros and cons of globalization.

Today, I feel it is only fair to begin with the land of the free, home of the brave, The United States of America. I would never dream of complaining about having the privilege to grow up here, however, like anywhere else, we have our downfalls. First, let’s discuss the positive things; our government is democratic and we theoretically get a say in who leads us. Although this system may not be perfect and it favors individuals with money who can give the best deceptive sale’s pitch, we make do. Our economic system favors paving your own way, capitalism, freedom to own property, freedom to create and distribute (unless it’s dangerous obviously) and the ability for the poorest of the poor to rise up the ranks if given the right opportunities (which isn’t always the case).

In the U.S. there are minimal threats of violence unless you live in select areas, are a specific group of people (prejudice still exists) or happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Gun violence is on the rise, due in part to the media’s constant portrayal of these events, which may plant ideas in other’s heads. The media itself is often biased and pushing an agenda, although on the surface it may seem to be objective and informative.

Geographically where you grow up in the U.S. plays a role in your value system. There are more conservative, home grown, traditional people, and more liberal, open-minded, free-spirited people, and much of that depends on where your values lie and whether you were exposed to those different from you when you were young. The constitution emphasizes freedom and individuality and therefore differing opinions are encouraged, which in theory seems amazing, but it also means as a nation, we aren’t often on the same page when it comes to important decisions.

Therefore, it can take a lot to make a monumental change. Peaceful protests from citizens call for reform that is slow to be implemented. The ability for a group of regular people to gain the attention of government officials without force is extremely positive, but whether or not our government listens to us has arguably more to do with what benefits them and what is easiest to accomplish than what is best for the citizens.

In addition, criticisms of wealthy countries with freedom and privilege, especially the United States, claim that the majority of citizens are tone-deaf to the struggles of other nations, entitled, greedy, or even stuck-up. We live in our little bubble, visit other places as if they were exotic and foreign when it benefits us, and then leave. We dabble in foreign affairs, but our goal is often to “fix” other countries, not to assist them. Unless, of course, it benefits us in a mutual trade. Here is a link to an article about what individuals from other countries think of when they hear “America.” 

We are hesitant to invite others into our bubble, we want to remain safe and secure in our own ways even if it means turning innocent, desperate, impoverished people away. We are America and we are free to reign supreme. Some other countries are resentful and hostile, and who could blame them. Here is a link to U.S. immigration trends from 2013-2017 based on the census conducted during that time. The trends highlighted on this website point to a more diverse community at home that is already steadily growing, and it would serve us well to stay informed.

I myself am guilty of some of these faults. I think they should change, but like many of us, I’m not sure how to go about such sensitive and gigantic issues alone. My singular opinion does nothing but sound the alarm. Through this journey analyzing our world objectively, I hope to open my eyes to the bigger picture, and I hope if you come along with me, we can accomplish this monumental task together. Thanks so much for reading, until next time (: