Sumblog 11

Reading 55 talks about the changes that are happening among the involvement of the young population, specifically women and how relatively new forms of media are organizing cultures. It starts off with a little debate arguing whether or not these growing rates in technology use is more dominated by female or male groups but ultimately concluding with the focus on that the participation by both groups is still structured by gender and other dimensions of the social experience. The new technologies (such as smart phones and the internet) that come along with this generation are continued to be believed as the best way to get younger people involved with current events and politics but the immediate problem seen at the same time is the disengagement with the issue. I personally know I have this problem too. I need the shock value to really connect and even remember issues that may be detrimental to others but something that I just scroll by because it isn’t happening to me (like the people in the homeless video with their relatives on the street). In regard to the use of these new technologies having expanding women’s groups I believe is due to the youth of the groups themselves. There may not be as many obstacles established over gender in forming an online group or some type of media for women online as there would be outside of it all. As the book states however “Often, ‘good participation’ is defined as young people’s membership, taking part, or sharing decision-making in pre-existent programs…” (p.729). To what extent would you tell someone to their face you disagree with them as compared to what you would say through some other indirect and even anonymous means as a computer for example?  With the standard of ‘good’ achieved by simply participating, how much benefit can somebody really have in making a difference toward the cause that organization is for?

Sumblog 10

There’s a Global divide happening and there’s more than one possible outcome. Never before had I considered anything close to an optimistic ending when thinking about the distant economic future. It was enlightening to read of how the labor demands of the economic system are conceptually a pyramid scheme in that there are great fortunate winners but only very few, leaving the majority living with very less.  The idea of eliminating the need for manual labor would also eliminate the losers of the pyramid scheme equation by introducing technology advanced enough to complete the tasks of the same demand as a low-level worker. It might seem like a farfetched idea but say it could happen; what would the system look like then?

Continuing into the more pessimistic approach, Scott Sernau writes how states often compete and try to “steal” businesses from each other by offering large tax breaks to the businesses so they’ll locate inside the state’s boundaries creating more jobs there but in making those offers they lose a large amount of tax revenue to support public institutions as Sernau puts it. Essentially it’s good as a short term approach but you’re kind of caught with your hand in your pants when it comes to having to come up with some money down the line. States are shooting themselves in the foot by creating these “business friendly” environments that facilitate company growth while weakening the foundations it’s built on: the workers. By encouraging “low taxes, low wages, few unions and environmental regulations” companies are able to offer jobs while lowering the satisfaction levels of the people working those jobs. Having a job is nice but for minimal pay, benefits and protections, don’t expect anyone to stick around very long.

            It’s a little shameful to say but I have never given this issue as broad of a look as this reading has offered with just this little amount of background knowledge. The futures I see playing out in real time, I have only previously envisioned in fiction.

Good ol' Calvin and Hobbes reminding us all to keep the "little guy" happy.

 

Sumblog 9

Climate of Fear, reading 38 in our text highlights the problems of discrimination and hate crimes pressed upon undocumented immigrants living in the northeast United States. It summarizes how “social institutions, such as the criminal justice system and the government often contribute to the creation of a climate of hate directed at immigrants.” (p.525). Suffolk county of New York state is home to six of the top 100 wealthiest zip codes in the entire nation, and though there are many affluent families there are also those living much more modestly. The stratification systems in place to maintain a degree of segregation are clearly seen in the legislation. “County Executive Levy in June 2006 mocked activists demonstrating against hate crime violence and the mass eviction of zoning laws” (p.530) was quoted after several incidents of Hispanic minorities who were targeted on while walking on the streets and beaten severely simply for their ethnicity. All of the examples in the reading mention that “in most cases the attackers are white males in their teens or 20’s” (p.529) often members of the high school athletic teams and it is important to note that these crimes are always committed in groups. Whether it’s as direct as jumping a person on the street or implementing stricter policies to target undocumented immigrants; the groupthink phenomenon fuels the discrimination. My own personal experience parallels the examples in the text, how all of the incidents are made up of a group of people bullying one other person and never one person by themselves bullying another. As the book mentions how people reported being chased on foot into the woods by vehicles  and shot by bb guns and pepper spray in drive-bys I thought back to a time a few years ago where I was out on my motorcycle riding home when a group of high school aged kids in a truck were blatantly swerving in and out of my lane getting closer each time to the point where I was forced off the road, needless to say it was infuriating. I couldn’t imagine someone getting as much enjoyment by themselves as they would terrorizing others in a group, though I’m sure it’s happened before. So in summary regardless of the scale, social institutions have a way of blinding people’s inherent morality and permitting them the confidence and justification to act out uncharacteristically.

This media piece is a song such as a million others that talk about the large scale discrimination of government institutions.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mhP4zfa3qc

Sumblog 8

               In class discussion on the case of immigration reform we talked about the recent changes in numbers coming into and out of the United States and some of the factors that could be influencing the fluctuations. Various opinions were suggested ranging from the U.S.’s economic recession and stricter boarder security that are likely to be behind the lower Mexico to United States immigration numbers. But there has also been a large change in the amount of people moving in the opposite direction, going from the United States to Mexico. Are the influences of the push and pull factors keeping this ratio in balance or is there a shift swaying it to one side or another?

                Our class reading The Treacherous Triangle: Justice, Immigration Enforcement, and Child Welfare claims that the system we have in place does not equally favor all. This reading begins with the story of Roberta who was an undocumented immigrant who was traveling home from a family party with 3 of her children when she was pulled over and had admitted to have been drinking that night, the officer administered a Breathalyzer and was found out she was over the legal limit. She was put under arrest and when her immigration status was revealed she was moved to an immigration detention center, lost contact with her children and after seven months detained she was deported back to Mexico without her children. The system in place that separated Roberta from her children is unforgivingly structured to remove anyone regardless of the circumstances if they are an illegal immigrant to the United States. In the book it mentioned that over one fourth of deportees who come through the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) program have no prior criminal conviction (such as Roberta) and another 30 percent only involve minor charges.  This system evacuates plenty of suitably fit parents and families simply because they are in violation of the correct documentation and not because of more serious and harmful offenses. This system is so structured in deporting illegal immigrants that the methods offered to the detainees in order to simply be reunited with their children are often impossible because of the restrictions placed on them by the system itself. It seems cruel to wave the possibilities to be with their children again in their face when there is no way of actually achieving it. This is definitely a flawed system that needs to be re-prioritized.

                This media piece is a bit of a pick me up from the reading, it’s a song by Bob Dylan who sings about “coming to America” and in doing so finding out that if you have no privileges or status that you’re going to have a rough time. It’s one of my favorites and has some funny things to think about.  The link to the song http://vimeo.com/35540786 and to the lyrics http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/bobdylan/bobdylans115thdream.html