Going Beyond What You See

For the last several month I have been involved heavily with an organization called Nothing But Nets. They are a part of the United Nations Foundation that works to prevent the spread and contraction of Malaria across the African Continent. I have been a part of a student fellowship with the organization where I go to trainings in Washington DC and then am responsible for bringing the campaign to my campus.

The way the organization works is extremely simple; $10 sends a life saving bed net to a family in Africa. At its base-most level, this is an incredibly easy concept to get behind. Malaria kills a child every 60 seconds, creates more than 3 billion dollars in lost productivity every year, and is a highly preventable and treatable disease. It is made so easy for the average person to get involved in this campaign.

This is what makes Nothing But Nets so attractive to me in the first place; easy to get involved, hard to argue against. While Nothing But Nets and its partners have worked to raise many millions of dollars over the last 10 years or so, this is not nearly enough to reach the longterm goal of total eradication of Malaria. That would cost approximately 5.6 billion dollars, an impossible figure for a single, or even group of charity organizations who rely entirely on the goodwill of donors through grassroots campaigns to achieve. Fortunately however, Nothing Buts Nets recognizes this set back and tackles it in a way few charity organizations I have heard of do.

The Nothing But Nets model goes beyond the basic donation model and actively encourages its supporters to engage in advocacy, and engages politically as an organization. It teaches people how to, why to, and where to talk to your congressmen and senators, and the specific legislation or government funds necessary to conquer Malaria. Nothing But Nets itself works very closely with many key members of Congress as well as several organizations within the United Nations in order to assure the maximum amount of funding and on the ground support that they can receive. This is how Nothing But Nets manages to have somewhere in the range of 2-3 billion dollars of direct support going towards Malaria research, prevention, and treatment.

They still go even further with their mission however. 5 of the $10 it takes to send a bed net goes toward the actual production of the nets. This is often done in factories in areas where Malaria is pertinent in order to connect the people effect to the issue itself. The other $5 goes towards training locals to distribute nets, educate their neighbors on how to properly use them and why, and towards training local healthcare professionals in a successful attempt to build up the healthcare systems in the regions most effected.

Nothing But Nets is not a one trick pony. This is the reason I love working with them so much. They serve as an excellent model for teaching my friends and peers how to build up their own organizations or projects. The more angels from which you tackle an issue, the more connections to other organizations, the more your elected officials are invested in them, the more success you are going to have in your endeavor. Its unquestionable.

I implore you all to think about the causes you care most about, the organizations you are most involved with,  and to think about what ways they can go beyond what they can see. I would love to serve as a resource to you on coming up with ways of engaging more deeply in the work that you are trying to do. Seriously, hit me up I want to be challenged, I love when people don't think their organizations can do any more than they already do, and I want to help people and groups be more successful in the important work they do than they already are.


-Jason Flatt

Importance of leadership

I feel as though up to this point in class and in readings we've focused mainly on the personal aspect of civic and political engagement, in that we pose the question “what can I do”, and while I do feel that this is one of the most important questions we can ask ourselves in this context, I think it’s also important to appreciate the impact our leaders have on the engagement in our societies. In an ideal world, societies would be completely self sufficient in that communities would come together to assess and solve the issues that they face, but I believe this overlooks a major aspect of human psychology, in that for the most part people like to fit in, to be a part of a group, this instinct not to stray or get left behind, or in other terms: “to follow the leader”. From the “Neither Leaders nor Followers” reading that we did, we learned about the ironic disservice where a charismatic and successful or idolized leader ends up doing the most harm to their respective society.
While the statement is valid, in that usually the death of such great leaders, especially when still in power (such as JFK and FDR) causes and overwhelming sense of hopelessness or distraught, I don’t believe it’s fair to say that outweighs the contributions of their leadership. While yes it is the case that it would be much more beneficial for a society to be stable and self reliant, it is easy for people to forget about the issues that may not plague them, but still be widespread through out their society. Bringing these issues to light is not only the responsibility of a leader, its their success in creating a better society that we use as one of the criteria in determining their “greatness” or success as a leader.
By far the most important thing a leader can do is to use their position to bring awareness and change to social issues within their community. For example any issue would become more mainstream. Leaders have the ability to greatly inspire their community, especially as figures who are “idolized”. If they take up certain issues that they deem important than the citizens who view them with such high regard will either be swayed by their support, or compelled to do their own research. It is the responsibility of these leaders to use their positions of power to try to change the problems they see in society. By being in these positions of power these leaders also have more of an ability to make change. Especially in societies like ours, where this strong leadership can be used to bring about change and come together for change. For example when Obama takes a strong stance on an issue it becomes validated on a both national and interaction stage, his support makes the issues that my have once been overlooked serious topics up for national debate.
















http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_why_good_leaders_make_you_feel_safe#t-676473

Good Intentions are Simply Not Enough

There are a number of different angles from which civic engagement can be looked at.  What I have personally found most interesting to discuss so far this year involves looking at civic engagement through a service-oriented lens.  I believe that an overwhelming problem our society faces in regards to volunteering, donating, serving, etc., is the lack of research that people are willing to put into the time/money they are so “graciously” donating to certain causes.  The article To Hell With Good Intentions, though provocative, brings about a number of valid points regarding the serious controversies that surround the concept of service and forces people to face them head on. 

I believe that an inherent problem with the overwhelming majority of society in regards to service is that we tend to rely on our “good intentions” alone when walking into a service project or signing a check off to a cause in a third world country, and walk away feeling assured that we have made a positive impact.  Not enough people are willing to research or listen to what issues are prevalent at that time in a particular society from the people that actually live in the society, or even if they want to be helped at all.  More often than not, outsiders walk onto a service site with their own preconceived notions about exactly what the population that they are helping needs, as opposed to working with that group of people to find out what would actually be the most valuable for them.  Who are we, acting as a group of ignorant strangers, to walk in to a society and define their biggest problems and decide the best way to fix them?   It is essential to understand that we do not have to advertise and flaunt our own “superiority” and predetermined role of making a definable difference in peoples’ lives.  We too often need some type of affirmation that we are in fact making that “difference” that is so heavily emphasized in service work.  I believe that it can be a bigger testament to how committed you are to serving others when you are willing to admit that you were merely a set of hands in a process, or accept that a certain population may truly not want your help.   

Though I believe the article spoke in too severe a tone and that service is certainly an important aspect of our society, I also believe that it is important for us to step back and be willing to address our own inability and helplessness in certain situations.  I believe that more service learning efforts should be put into play, putting a greater emphasis on the exchange that can occur between cultures and the solidarity that can be fostered to create lasting, meaningful relationships.  We should make greater efforts to work with as opposed to exert power over the people we are attempting to aid.  Let go of your own pride, build relationships, and work to bridge instead of widen gaps between communities.   Good intentions are necessary to perform service; however, good intentions alone are simply not enough. 

Here is a TED Talk  reviewing more of I have talked about –

http://www.ted.com/talks/ernesto_sirolli_want_to_help_someone_shut_up_and_listen

Matt's Reflection

        So far this semester, it appears we have been focusing particularly on the basics of civic engagement, yet I fell as if it has really started to focus on the integration of democracy into society. This is primarily due to a few things, notably the requirement upon citizens for a democracy to function correctly, and the striving for democracy and freedom among people. This can be seen through a few things such as a few articles we have read and the Skype conversation we had with the students in Turkey.

We have read a few articles regarding democracy so far this year. Some of the most striking I found regarded the striving for civil liberties in a democracy. The article regarding the black family whose daughter was attending an white school in New Orleans really revealed how civic engagement is necessary for the proper functioning of a democracy. At the time, the United States was a type of democracy, however it faced multiple issues that damaged the democratic ideals of the country. The perseverance of that family and the little girl helped to change the views of the people who were so vocally opposed to equality in that city. This brings up important ideas and questions. One such question revolves around how civic engagement has changed over time, “Do people still make major efforts to solve social problems through Civic Engagement?”. This question is harder to tell, as many of the social problems today are not as easily seen as the clear differences in equality of the Civil Rights Era. 

However, a striving for rights, and social change seem to be quite clear in other areas which are “emerging democracies” such as Turkey. While partaking in the Skype call with the two students from Turkey, I along with many others in the class were struck with the degree of passion they had toward affecting change in their country both politically and socially. Could this level of passion for civic engagement be based upon the fact that they have more problems than us, or is it something else? These are the types of questions necessary to ask in order to better be able to partake in civic engagement in our own community. Questions such as this require us to understand the dynamics of citizens responses to issues and how they react. If we can see what drives others to be so engaged, we can use that same passion to get more people to become engaged civically with their own communities. 

A Good Life and Intentions with the Special Olympics

Over the past year I have been volunteering every Wednesday at the special olympics at Johnson City high school. In my time there I have gotten to know the people who come once a week in order to train by bench pressing and dead lifting for their regional competition. My team and I are in charge of spotting and changing weights for the competitors. Although I am there to just change weights and spot these fierce competitors, I have learned a lot just from attending and listening. Many of the special olympic competitors there absolutely need the help of me and my teammates because they cannot be left alone in a weight room. Other competitors need us for more than just switching their weights and often talk to us about how their days went. They may just tell us how their days went, but when I listen I also hear how their lives are much different and how they overcome their daily struggles. One competitor who I take care of personally who everybody calls “Bulldog” is always talking to me about his nephew who he absolutely adores. The compassion of some of these people is inspiring and is what constantly brings me back every week. After a few weeks in this course I realize that in discussion we often talk about how you should help the community because it is the right thing to do and not for any personal gain. I believe that personal gain is inevitable while being civically engaged and there is nothing wrong with that. It has taught me to appreciate what I have and appreciate the fact that these competitors’ days are made just by telling a story about their day.

While participating in the special olympics, two readings from this course have been extremely relatable and have stuck out to me. One of those readings was an excerpt from The Call of Service. What stood out most in that entire reading when Robert Coles wrote, “I also began to be aware of all that was happening as I Did my work- the comments I heard and overheard, the thoughts that crossed my mind and, not least, the range of feelings that I experienced.” The reasons that stands out so much is because I have the same exact experience during the special olympics. I hear how many of the competitors are annoyed that they are being treated like children and how they are unable to drive due to their disabilities. I also hear how much they love coming to special olympics and see how passionate they are about lifting and winning. It is often eye opening and question provoking. Why is it such a small crowd helping these competitors? Why do they get almost no funding and have to lift in a high school gym? How should I treat these people if they do not want to be babied? I do not have the answers for these questions, but many competitors often do not care about the conditions they lift in. To answer the questioned of how to treat these competitors is unknown to me as well although I have learned which people need it and those who do not.

Another article that truly stuck out to me was “To Hell with Good Intentions.” Although it may be odd to say “To hell with good intentions” at the special olympics I think that it may actually be the case with helping some competitors there. Some competitors are less mentally or physically impaired and do not want my assistance. They are offended when I ask them if they need help or even if I say “good job.” These competitors do not want to be considered “special” and do not want to be treated differently. This is relative to what we discussed in class because some people do not want help. Some people not wanting help is not a bad thing and people who are involved with their community must understand that. Although “Good Intentions” regarded civic engagement on a national level it is still relative to civil engagement on a much smaller level. There is no clear line where civil engagement is not needed and it would be very difficult to draw that line. Is it possible to make a more clear line? I do not think so, but if you do feel free to comment on my post!

Another question: In class we talked about a “good life” and how it involves giving back to your community. Can a person with special needs still live a “good life” if they do not give back to the community because they are unable to do so? If so, how?

[“God didn't call America to do what she's doing in the world now. (Preach it, preach it) God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war as the war in Vietnam. And we are criminals in that war. We’ve committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I'm going to continue to say it. And we won't stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. ... Every now and then I go back and read Gibbons' Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. And when I come and look at America, I say to myself, the parallels are frightening. And we have perverted the drum major instinct.” (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “The Drum Major Instinct”) “I do have deep faith in the enormous good will of the U.S. volunteer. However, his good faith can usually be explained only by an abysmal lack of intuitive delicacy. By definition, you cannot help being ultimately vacationing salesmen for the middle-class ‘American Way of Life,’ since that is really the only life you know. A group like this could not have developed unless a mood in the United States had supported it - the belief that any true American must share God's blessings with his poorer fellow men. The idea that every American has something to give, and at all times may, can and should give it, explains why it occurred to students that they could help Mexican peasants ‘develop’ by spending a few months in their villages. Of course, this surprising conviction was supported by members of a missionary order, who would have no reason to exist unless they had the same conviction - except a much stronger one. It is now high time to cure yourselves of this. You, like the values you carry, are the products of an American society of achievers and consumers, with its two-party system, its universal schooling, and its family-car affluence. You are ultimately-consciously or unconsciously - "salesmen" for a delusive ballet in the ideas of democracy, equal opportunity and free enterprise among people who haven't the possibility of profiting from these.” (Ivan Illich’s “To Hell With Good Intentions”)]

Martin Luther King Jr. spoke of the Drum Major Instinct as the use of leadership to better the lives of others through the giving of one’s self to serve the community. When the Drum Major Instinct is perverted and contorted to be leadership through authority, fear, and self-serving intentions, atrocities such as war and imperialism can occur. King was correct in stating how America was wrong for getting involved in a war (the Vietnam War) that was essentially none of our business, regardless of the good intention of wanting to contain communism. America’s goal as a country seems to be to use the military to spread democracy and freedom to underdeveloped countries. In doing so, they attempt to set up a fair and democratic system, and have that type of government solidify and integrate through the society before radicals take over the developing country. The Vietnam War was a perfect example of hegemony. Hegemony is defined as showing the capacity and ability to present one’s own interests as the general or universal interests, and in effect, leading the country by these interests.

This policy of hegemony is shown through America’s policy of policing the world, which is fueled by America’s invincible Military Industrial Complex. To take on the role of “the world police” is prideful and arrogant. It requires the assumption that the desires of America mimic the the rest of the world, and is therefore the best course of action for the rest of the world. Pride and arrogance are two things that King highlights as issues in our country’s mindset, which factor into the perversion of the Drum Major Instinct. In “To Hell With Good Intentions,” Illich essentially tells America to mind it’s own business because no matter how much Americans want to help other countries, America will ultimately fail due to cultural differences and our overall condescending attitudes towards the natives there. We assume that anyone who isn’t like us, is by default, inferior, primitive, and in need of saving. The intentions of saving underprivileged people may seem pure, albeit narcissistic, but so did the Vietnam War at the time. The good intentions used to back the Vietnam War are now, in hindsight, considered a failed idea. Historians highlight the Vietnam War as one of the two biggest blunders in current American foreign policy, the other being Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The perversion of the Drum Major Instinct being paraded around as an act of good intentions was seen yet again in Syria last year. Many Americans were upset that our government was getting involved overseas and policing the world again. Americans were not the only ones to take notice. The President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, wrote an article to the New York Times on September 11th last year. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html The date the article was published (September 11th, 2013) was a clear reference to our involvement in the middle east after 9/11, specifically Operation Iraqi Freedom, since America was planning to declare military action against Syria due to the alleged use of chemical weapons. The desire to eradicate chemical weapons can be paralleled to America’s hunt to find the “weapons of mass destruction” that former President George W. Bush tried to do as a result of 9/11. In this article, Putin speaks of American exceptionalism (which can be seen as a perversion of the Drum Major Instinct), referencing to our ignorance on an issue and our arrogance of wanting to go ahead on military action despite the pleas of other political entities to stop. “The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.” King’s speech spoke out against the Vietnam War and likened our country to the Roman Empire, therefore calling our country an empire. Illich’s speech called out our ignorance and superiority complex in regards to wanting to “save” underdeveloped countries. Putin’s op-ed to the New York Times warned of the dangers of a country seeing itself as exceptional. The questions at hand are as follows: Has America’s hegemonic military actions of “world police” gone too far to the point of perverting the Drum Major Instinct? If so, how do we stop it, reverse the effects, and restore America to the correct use of the Drum Major Instinct?