Let's Treat People like People

           In class last week, we discussed Service and Civic Engagement during the Thanksgiving holiday. Something that stayed with me from that class, was the fact that people can be extremely patronizing when attempting to serve others. This is especially true for people who we deem "less fortunate" than we. I feel like sometimes we tend to be so quick to throw a pity party and feel bad for these "poor people" and then forget exactly what they are, people. We end up reducing them to helpless creatures who don't know any better and who will likely suffer without our help.

We should make efforts to see how they feel about their current situations instead of assuming we know the causes of their circumstances. In an earlier blog post written by Mohamed, he touched on poverty in the U.S and one thing that I noted was that one of the causes of poverty can be attributed to public perception about poverty. I recall a moment when My father was driving me to school and we saw a man collecting bottles on the street. My father took one glance at this man and said to me "If you don't do well in school, that's how you'll end up." 

He failed to understand that by making that statement to me, he completely erased any other possibility for that man's situation. It's easier to write people off as not having worked their hardest to get out of a situation, and this is because it takes pressure off of oneself in regards to helping them. If you don't believe it is in any way your fault for causing a problem, you're most likely not going to help someone who is struggling, and if you do help, it feels more like "they should be grateful that I'm giving my time for them" rather than "I'm happily giving my time". 

It is also simply easier to help someone when you hear their own side of the story. It reminds me of the article that stated that it makes more sense to give money to food banks than it does to donate canned food. Why would you take it upon yourself to dictate what someone else should eat? In the same sense, why should you dictate the type of assistance a person needs if you don't even know the circumstances of their situation? 

It's important to hear people out or at least do our part to be informed of the problems surrounding the issues we wish to volunteer our time to. This way we can properly interact with the people who are in these situations while being able to treat them as individuals. This leads to collaboration of ideas on how to eradicate a certain issue, and can likely lead to a better outcome in terms of long-term effects. It's also important to understand that while these individuals and families do need assistance, they are not helpless. If we can learn to assist people while treating them as people, we can gain quite the distance in battles against many of the issues we have today. 

Extaordinary or Just a stroke of luck?

To be honest when I started taking this class I would have never viewed myself as ever becoming an activist. This class was 4 credits and the "P" I needed to graduate at the end of the semester. It wasn't until the memoir project that any kind of real interest would spark. Jody Williams memoir "My name is Jody Williams" was extremely inspiring. She spends a great portion talking about and describing how much of a normal person and normal life she had. We made the argument in class that Jody and Malala were extraordinary in what they accomplished, and you would be a fool to disagree, but the methods to which they gained their claim to fame was simply being in the right place at the right time. Jody won a Nobel prize for banning the use and production of land mines, which 10 years prior she didn't even know was a problem. She had no expertise in the field, yet she was approached with the option and didn't really have anything else going for her so she went for it. She learned as she went and ended up being very good at it. This sounds like any capable human that has any kind of dedication. It is understandable that the lifestyle of a hardcore activist is not one that many people would take on, including myself, but believe that anybody could be a Jody Williams.

The Malala story shares the exact same argument, I believe that Malala was simple lucky enough to live to become a martyr for a cause. As the professor Lubna Chaudry, Chair, Human Development Department, explained when presenting her research to the class, there were many like Malala; kids who stood up to the Talaban and education rights, yet most of them did not live to see fame, or for some reason were just not recognized. I believe in the eyes of the people in the Swat Valley Malala was just simply another person standing up to the Talaban for not only survival but their rights. I don't think they saw her as a hero, I think that many of the kids there could have been a Malala if it had been them who had been shot and lived. None the less I'm sure they are extremely proud of her for winning the Nobel prize.

 Both of these are examples of 'normal' people who are put in extraordinary positions and make the best out of them, both resulting in a Nobel peace prize. I think a person could be a passionate activist all of his/her life and never see a Nobel Prize, I think it has less to do with being a diehard activist, and more about being in the right place at the right time. What do you think?

The Pressing Issues of Poverty

Poverty has remained a persistent problem throughout the course of history in America but has only been addressed recently in the past few decades. In the 1960s, President Lyndon Johnson enacted many different policies to combat poverty, which has been only somewhat successful since it has only dropped the percentage of people in poverty by about a half in the span of four decades. Despite the initial success of “the war on poverty”, statistics show that the overall poverty rate has remained stagnant around 15% in the last recent years, which is about 46.5 million Americans.

The reason why poverty is such a pressing issue is because there is still a vast majority of Americans who are still poverty-stricken but do not receive the attention they deserve from our society. The United States consistently has higher poverty rates than any other developed nation in the world, yet it is hardly addressed at an institutional level and does not grab hold of the attention of policy makers. Many Americans and politicians believe that people in poverty have brought their own misfortunes upon them because of their poor qualities and ethics of working towards success. What this fails to take in mind is that the nature of people’s socioeconomic status can be a product of their circumstances.

There is an NPR article of a Mother’s essay that challenges the misconceptions of poverty in our modern society and a great example of unfortunate circumstances that befalls a family. The mother drives around a luxury car which was bought before her family hit a rough patch and fell into poverty because of the turn in the economy after the market crash. The family’s income dropped down to the poverty time as they were temporary unemployed. They had to rely on the same basic safety nets as many of the other Americans that were permanently poor and stuck in poverty. Unlike the mother’s family that was able to bounce back and recover from their economic distress, many Americans still struggle to move up on the socioeconomic ladder because of the huge, growing income inequality gap. Governments should work more diligently to alleviate the income equality and eradicate poverty overall.

http://www.npr.org/2014/07/12/330680161/expectations-of-poverty

Immigration Forum

This evening, I attended the immigration forum, along with my immigration group, that Professor Campbell mentioned in class earlier today. I thought that this forum was very eye opening and contained a lot of information that I think is under-represented when talking about Immigration. For example, one of the speakers named Stephen mentioned the DACA program which directly affects immigrant students. Binghamton University contains many immigrants in which DACA affects them personally as well. DACA stands for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals which is a policy directive that provides temporary deportation relief and work authorization, among other benefits, to qualifying immigrant youth and young adults. This directive allows students to get help from the government, which includes getting scholarships to better their education which in turn will help them get a better job and to better their lives. Essentially, this directive will allow immigrant youths to social climb and to join the middle class and not get stuck in the "immigrant poverty" lifestyle.

In the forum, there was also a brief "history lesson" about the progression of immigration in the United States starting from the 1790 naturalization act and going up to the DREAM act of 2014. The common theme through out history about immigration was this idea of being the "ideal" immigrant, meaning that you are white, are of middle class and that you can be a "good citizen" meaning that you take advantage of all that America has to offer and positively contribute to society. This idea of being a "good citizen" is so arbitrary and relative. Lisbeth shared a personal story about her mom and how in the eyes of the government she wasn't a "good citizen" because she didn't advance herself (in the sense that her english is poor and never advanced her education). However an audience member pointed out that the "good citizen" idea is a "moral euphemism for economic need", meaning that the government will only view her as a "good citizen" if she is doing something that the government needs at the time. If you were to compare Lisbeth to her mom, Lisbeth would be seen as the "good citizen" in the eyes of the government because she is furthering her education and can speak english exceptionally well and is positively contributing to society. However I think that you have to look at the given different circumstances that both Lisbeth and her mom were placed in when the immigrated to the U.S. It wouldn't be fair to call Lisbeth's mom not a good citizen because she was a single mom raising 3 daughters in a new country with no time to really learn english or to go back to school. However, Lisbeth only being 10 years old was able to go to school, learn english, get an education and even go onto earning her MPA. The two aren't comparable because of the different circumstances they were placed in.

The Malala Problem

After reading I Am Malala, I am still shocked about the differences
between our life in America and Malala’s life in Pakistan.  I know I
have a good life, and that I should be thankful for living in a
democracy and that I receive rights that we as American’s take for
granted such as freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom of
assembly and free and fair elections.   Malala’s life was just awful.
She was scared to going to school since  the Taliban threatened her
life and the lives of others.  The only time I have been scared about
school was when I was getting back a test.  As a civic engagement
class we need to help Malala’s goal and try to give every person an
education.  We need everyone treated fairly,  and receive the proper
treatment that an American would receive.  We are living in the 21
first century it’s about time that  every person gets equal rights.



There is so much I learned from Malala.  Whenever I give up hope and
think about how bad things are going, such as school, I think about
Malala and how she is fighting for everyone to get an education.  I
think about how she never stopped doing the right thing.  When I am
scared to do something because of the uncertainty of the outcome, I
think about Malala and her family being scared for her life every
single day that she and her dad were advocating for women’s education.
Malala is the symbol for hope, freedom and bravery.



From this I learn that even under the most dire circumstances one
should never give up hope.  With effort, one can always make a
difference; one should not be scared to stand up for what it is right.
If you stand for nothing you fall for anything and Malala stood for
education and that is something that is very important to both of us.
I learned that age does not matter.  The number of followers is less
significant, but with careful work and planning, support is likely to
grow over time, as it did with Ziuddin's school.  One can make a
difference at any point in their life.  Most importantly, one needs to
believe in them self, just like Malala.



It’s time that Malala learns from the rest of the world.  We have
learned a lot from here it's her turn to learn from us. What is the
best way to solve Malala's problem? How can we education to everyone
in the world?  Is it by telling Malala’s story?  Is it by speaking out
about education?  Is it going to rallies and marches to promote
education globally?  Is it calling or sending letters to politicians
around the globe?. While I cannot say with certainty that any of these
answers will completely solve the problems of educating the world, I
do know that the only way to find out is to test these solutions.

The Global Citizens Festival: A Slacktivists Dream!

After watching the Africa for Norway videos on YouTube in class on Monday, it got me thinking about music and charity concerts such as the Global Citizen Festival and whether they are in fact beneficial. One of the things we discussed in class on Monday was how the eradication of extreme poverty is the main challenge of our time. The Global Citizen Festival is an example of a charity concert that attempts to address this very issue of extreme poverty. In class I got to thinking of whether the concert was in fact beneficial, whether it made the attendees ‘global citizens’, whether the festival was worth it and if so how.

For those of you that don’t know, the Global Citizen Festival is held in New York City’s Central Park (an esteemed location in the heart of one of the most privileged cities in the world), there are roughly 60,000 attendees and artists, policy makers, government members and influencers also attend, all listening to speeches, listening and watching performances and music and all with the same goal of eradicating global poverty by 2030. This past festival took place on September 27, 2014. Some of the world leaders that attended this year were the World Bank President Jim Yong Kim, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi and Prime Minister of Liberia, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, as well as over 30 celebrities such as Jay Z and Beyonce, Carrie Underwood, Tiesto. The festival proves to be a very star-studded event. In order to get a free ticket for this event, one must simply answer some questions on the Global Citizen Festival website which will then put the person into a drawing with the chance to win one of the 48,000 free tickets.

I believe that the festival simply serves as a catalyst to help build a movement—it is also broadcasted to millions on television but I am not sure if it does anymore than just that. Advocacy is absolutely a critical part of this global issue, however it needs more than that. I admit that I watched the concert on TV, but I didn’t think much more of it just being a form of entertainment. I think it more so relieves our guilty consciences allowing us to “pretend” we were doing something meaningful by all agreeing that something needs to be done about poverty. I also feel like these concerts allow world leaders excellent PR opportunities to say they sympathize with a popular notion of justice or human rights, but as soon as the TV goes off, the leaders are back to what they were doing before, which it seems like sometimes it is just advocacy. Ultimately, I don’t think a concert as large as this will ever be a solution in itself to ending extreme poverty, but it can certainly be a catalyst for a broader advocacy movement that can have some real impact.

Lastly, I would like to bring the notion of slacktivism into this conversation. In order to win tickets to this show one must register, then you are encouraged to watch videos, sign petitions and share posts on FaceBook, Twitter, etc. in order to win points. Eight points guarantees one entry into the lottery. This system demands a person to devote their time to watching long videos and reading equally long articles about improving health. If lucky enough to gain a ticket to the event, you are repeatedly told you are making a difference in the world simply by sitting on the Great Lawn and listening to your favorite singers perform in front of you. The problem with this is that your attendance is not actually impactful because you don’t really do anything. Ultimately after your day at the concert you feel as though you made a difference so in most cases I would assume that a lot of the attendees don’t actively involve themselves in a charitable way beyond that point.  I am interested in your thoughts on whether a huge charity concert full of celebrity performers can make a true impact or whether it is simply a tremendous PR mechanism for celebrities and global leaders and a way for ordinary people to feel as though they are being impactful.

Below is a link to on the impact/outcome of the concert.

http://globalpovertyproject.com/globalcitizen/Impact/TheGlobalCitizenEffect_ImpactReport_2013.pdf

Also I encourage everyone to read some of the comments about the concert on the article below, they're really funny but also thought provoking in regards to the concerts impact:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/goatsandsoda/2014/09/26/351551568/a-concert-with-jay-z-and-the-president-of-india-aims-to-end-poverty

Civic Engagement: What it really is

Civic engagement is easily the most popular term thrown around our classroom, however if asked to give a proper definition of it off hand I probably couldn't tell you.  That is because civic engagement can't be defined in a small sense, but needs to be thought about in a broader way for us to fully understand it. This class sets out to tackle the task of finding out what constitutes civic engagement and from early on we observed Adler and  Groggin's definition that "civic engagement describes how an active citizen participates in the life of a community in order to improve conditions for others or to help their community's fture." While exploring the world of service the first step to understanding civic engagement is to understand what activities constitute as "improving conditions for others" and the broad view that must be taken into account to "help their community's future."

Through articles and discussions in class we have set out to uncover what service truly is, which opens the door to how we think about our service.  However, since just completing the memoir project last week I think that this is the most relevant tool that is shaping my views of engagement at the moment.  For this assignment I read Gregory Boyle's memoir Tattoo's on the Heart, which opened a whole new light on what kinds of service there are out there.  Prior to reading this novel I had very little knowledge on gang life or what prevention services that have been put into effect or if any were even implemented at all.  I think this is one of the main factors that influenced why I found Boyle so compelling, because through his work I was learning things I had never known before. Boyle sets out on a mission to help former gang members leave their previous life and start over by providing jobs and hope through his relationship with god and strong Jesuit views.  As someone with a different religious background it was interesting to me to see a different side of service by what motivates us to want to help people.  By creating a common ground between himself and the gang members, Boyle is able to reach out to them in ways that many people probably couldn't, because let's face it if you were given the chance would you choose to help gang members? Would you put yourself in a dangerous situation involving dangerous people for the cause you cared about? I think that is something we all need to think about when we are giving back.  Is what we are trying to help actually something we care about or are we doing it for alternative motives?

From the teachings of Boyle I have realized that I don't truly know what my passion is yet and until then I can't try to "save the world." I hope that one day I find that one thing that I find most important, because through the work of Boyle I have realized that wanting to help out (like I do within the community) and wanting to change something you truly care about are two different things.  An interesting question to consider is that if you would rather participate fully and completely to a cause you love or if helping here and there is enough?  I guess it just comes down to what you believe is valuable about service.  Are you doing service to make yourself feel good or do you genuinely care about what you are doing and the people you are helping? Is participating in something we aren't passionate about as valuable as something we are more emotional about.  Consider the scenario that you love dogs and have the choice to either help out at a local animal shelter working with dogs once a week for an hour or become the founder a large successful organization to save dolphins that will prevent any dolphins from being harmed by fisherman or human pollution in the ocean (super realistic, just pretend).  From your love of dogs you clearly care about animals in general, so would you choose to work minimally at the shelter or change the world in a larger way?   I still don't know everything about what civic engagement entails, but through the discussions in class and the work of Gregory Boyle I have learned that I believe service isn't about the overall outcome being perfect, but if you have changed something in a positive way, even if in the smallest way you have done enough.