Mission: Consumption

A Mission Statement by Rebecca Korn

 

            Everything you have ever bought, you have been sold on. There are so many different companies and brands for everything from clothes to salt, that you must make the decision to buy what you bought over what another company was selling, even though it is basically the exact same product. However, the modern world needs this consumption to stay alive, because without it most people would be out of jobs, and the economy would completely crash. It is not just products that people are buying nowadays. Now, people are being sold on services such as schools and dating websites. Everything is being advertised to convince you to buy their products, but only you can decide what you want to spend money on. Sometimes, you are just spending money on a name. For example, you could be paying a lot of money to go to a good school that everyone has heard of, or you could be paying less money to go to an equally good school.

            Similarly, you could spend a lot of money on clothing just for the brand, or get clothing of equal quality for much less money, but without a designer label on it. For some people, labels are important so they only buy designer clothing, and judge other people who do not. It is this judgment that makes other people feel that they need to buy designer clothing too, so they go out and spend and extraordinary amount of money on that. On the other hand, there are people who do not care about labels, and try to shop for cheap clothes so that they can save money. Either way, people try to use clothing as a way to be unique and show off their individuality, and use it to define them. Many people try to have their own unique style that is different from other people, but unless they are making their own clothes, there are going to be other people out there wearing the same thing.

            All of this consumption that we have in our society has caused people to not only buy what they need, but also what they want, what will make them happy. People have started to become fixated on what makes them happy, and have been convinced that to live a good life, they must be living a happy life. This makes people think that they must be at a job that makes them feel happy and fulfilled, even if they are not making a lot of money. It is definitely good to be happy with everything you buy and do, but if you need money you should not be going for the job that just makes you happy. Consumerism has caused this state of mind, which is not necessarily bad, but can become dangerous if someone becomes obsessed with it.

Operation: Your Possession Will Possess You

A Mission Statement by: Savannah Bishop

            “If you are not very careful, your possessions will possess you, TV taught me how to feel, now real life has no appeal”(Marina and the Diamonds, Oh No!) And this is honestly, terrifyingly true. If you look around at the people you surround yourself with everyday the thing that characterizes them most is their appearance. As often as we say that “beauty is more than skin deep” physical appearance and presentation is something that we use to define ourselves. We say, “I love your haircut,” “cute shoes,” and other variations on this theme.

            Just look at the British class system. While a lot is based simply on how you are born, your accent, and your manners, if you don’t dress the part no one will buy it. So you have to buy it. Zygmunt Bauman is a renowned sociologist and known for his strong critique of ‘consumer society.’ He argues that our society has changed from that of producers to that of consumers. This does not, of course, seem overly bad when you first consider it.

            In fact, it seems only natural that such might occur given the more recent and much broader societal shift from prohibition to enjoyment. We don’t try to ban alcohol; we go out and imbibe in it to a dangerous extent. In fact, the opposite of prohibition is now occurring. The perfect example of this is how marijuana, which was historically outlawed, is now being legalized in several states in the U.S.A. This is a very obvious move from prohibiting the substance to enjoying its positive effects in spite of the multitude of negative ones.

            With this societal shift consumerism is ingratiating itself, if it hasn’t already, with consumerism; and the virtue of patience is being steadily replaced with the pleasure of instant gratification. We go on “shopping sprees,” “dress to impress,” and send emails instead of mails via the post system. And yes, some of these things are because of improved technology. We can dress ourselves in an assortment of different apparel because we are able to make it and quickly with new technologies. The Internet allows us instantly gratifying contact with other human beings, successfully connecting people around the globe. So obviously there are good things here.

            But do these good things outweigh the bad? My generation has been dubbed the “Me, me, me Generation” and this can certainly ring true. And it isn’t even, necessarily our fault. With the advances we’ve made through technology, specifically new social outlets and media, we are able to appeal to a wider audience more quickly than ever before. But that’s also an issue. Because we are “appealing,” packaging ourselves into nice little boxes on check sheets so that others can have us defined as such.

            And we aren’t. This idea of self expression is not, as far as I am concerned, a bad one. The way we often go about it, however, is, as all it is doing is taking our money to give us the façade we chose. And sometimes I wonder what the world would look like if we all took off these masks. Because no one fits into neat little boxes, no matter how much easier it would be for our consumer society if we did. 

Operation: Hero of War…”It was a dog”

A Mission Statement by: Savannah Bishop

What is terrorism? Does one single definition even exist? And does one people’s idea of defense constitute another people’s terrorism? The United States Government has defined terrorism as violence that it motivated by politics, against non-militant groups like civilians, and enacted by sub-national groupings of people with the intention to influence an audience(Cohen and Kennedy, 2013, p.203). Interestingly enough, though perhaps unsurprising, this definition disqualifies entire nations, such as the U.S., from being a viable terrorist group.
One of my favorite bands, Rise Against, creates music about a variety of different social issues, one of which I find supplements my point adequately. This song, Hero of War, addresses some of the realities of being an American soldier in Afghanistan and Iraq during the “War on Terror.” (it is linked above) I found that this video demonstrates just why the American government, and other governments dealing with terrorism purposefully define the term in a way that excludes their own government and military.
This is because the realities of what people do in reaction to terrorism is often just as horrific when viewed from an outside perspective. Perhaps that is the issue with our notion of “terrorism.” Because while the notion of “terror” in the sense that it is viewed today came about during the French Reign of Terror, our current usage of the term terrorism is a much more recent development.
Along with the issue of terrorism and the reactions to it, I also want to address the subject of drones. Drones are “unmanned” military aircrafts capable of deploying bombs. While “unmanned,” means that physically the pilot is not in the plane, it does not accurately reflect that there is a human face behind the death toll each one creates. These drones and their pilots have caused quite a bit of confusion and turmoil.
Amnesty International wants to class US drone strikes as war crimes(Boone, 2013, p.1), the Pentagon’s original plan to award a medal to drone pilots was immensely controversial and canceled(LaGrone, 2013, p.1), and the issue of the killing of a child or innocent by a drone being referred to as “it was a dog”(Sherwell, 2013, p.1) is frankly heartbreaking. And I have to wonder, if 9/11 was the big start to terrorism in our eyes, mustn’t such seem like the start of terrorism in theirs?
So I go back to my original query. What is terrorism…and why does our definition exclude governments? Because our actions would be classified as such without this distinction?

References:

Confessions of a US drone operator: ‘I watched him die. It took a long time’ – Telegraph. 2013. Confessions of a US drone operator: ‘I watched him die. It took a long time’ – Telegraph. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10403313/Confessions-of-a-US-drone-operator-I-watched-him-die.-It-took-a-long-time.html. [Accessed 29 November 2013].
Pentagon Cancels Controversial Unmanned and Cyber Medal | USNI News. 2013. Pentagon Cancels Controversial Unmanned and Cyber Medal | USNI News. [ONLINE] Available at: http://news.usni.org/2013/04/15/pentagon-cancels-controversial-unmanned-and-cyber-medal. [Accessed 29 November 2013].

US drone strikes could be classed as war crimes, says Amnesty International | World news | The Guardian . 2013. US drone strikes could be classed as war crimes, says Amnesty International | World news | The Guardian . [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/22/amnesty-us-officials-war-crimes-drones. [Accessed 29 November 2013].

Mission: Defining Terrorism

A Mission Statement by Rebecca Korn

 

            This week, The Angels were tasked with the difficult mission of learning about terrorism. The first encounter we had with terrorism that we can remember was 9/11, when we were just six or seven years old, and could not even fully understand what happened, let alone comprehend what a terrorist was or what terrorism was. Unfortunately, after 9/11, many people in America, and possibly some other western countries around the world, started to associate terrorism with Islam. Many Americans, especially older white Americans, started to fear that people with a darker complexion were terrorists and dangerous. This is not the case, however, and terrorism should not just be associated with Islam. The majority of Muslims are not terrorists at all; it is only a very small percentage of certain extreme Islamist groups who become dangerous. Therefore, most Muslims should not be associated with terrorism. At the same time, terrorism should not just be associated with those extreme Islamist groups either. Anyone of any different nationality, religion, and race from a sub-national group can attack any non-threatening country for a political purpose and cause fear among its citizens, which is one definition of terrorism. Even, for example, an American could attack America, which would be classified as a domestic terrorist. The reason the United States use the term ‘sub-national’ in their definition of terrorism is because if they do not, they are at risk of being accused as terrorists themselves, because they send their troops in to countries that are not waging war against America and pose no threat to The States at that time.

            The United States government tries its best to do a lot to prevent any future terrorist attacks on The United States, like increasing security at airports and on airplanes. However, is it an invasion of privacy if they are possibly looking at what you are doing on the Internet to try and keep the country safe? I, personally, do not think so. I think that as long as you are doing nothing wrong on the Internet, you should not care if the government has access to your e-mail or Facebook or not. However, then some people are worried that the government is then letting colleges and companies have access to their Facebook pages, and are worried that they won’t get into college or get a job. This is a simple problem that I think people can solve by just not posting anything that could give a bad impression of them on Facebook, and putting the best version of yourself online. This is an easy solution because people control what they put on Facebook, and can control how they are perceived online. Therefore, I think that the American government have taken the right steps to prevent further terrorist attacks.

Operation: Terrorisom

A mission statement by Eliana Bernstein

September 11, 2001 started off like every other morning. My father would wake my siblings and I up, and help us get ready for another day of school. Every morning I would complain to my father about school and beg him to let me stay home. We had the same argument every single morning, and every single morning I would lose this argument. My mother was already on her trade to New York City for work. The only vivid memory I have of this day is being let out of school early. Both of my parents came to pick my siblings and I up from school. All of the other children were being picked up by their parents as well. Everyone was very quite walking home, but I was ecstatic to be out of school. I was skipping and singing and laughing while everyone silently walked home. As a six-year-old girl getting out of school early was a dream come true. Over the years I learned this dream was in fact a nightmare. Growing up I learned that the reason I was let out of school early was because of the terrorist attack that occurred in New York City. Islamic terrorist hijacked four passenger airlines. Two planes were flown into the North and South towers of the World Trade Center. A third plane was crashed into the Pentagon and the fourth plane was targeted for Washington D.C but crashed some where in Pennsylvania.

     Terrorism is one of the most visible forms of conflict that results form the clash between religions and ideologies. The idea of terror and terrorism began during the French Revolution that created a new way of thinking the enlightenment. However the definition of terrorism does not include the government and/or military action it is only politically motivated violence created by sub-national groups. It is targeted to non-combatant targets and is usually intended to influence an audience. Essentially terrorism is a socially defined form of violence, basically saying when you see the action you just know it is terrorism it doesn’t need to be explained. For example the bombing at the Boston Marathon this past year, everyone just knows it was an act terrorism.  

     The attacks that occurred on 9/11 created a new idea known as ‘war on terror’. This is a global conflict redefining political conflicts and creating the idea that everyone is potential at war. It blurs the line between civilian and solider. It gives off the vibe that a terrorist attack can happen whenever and wherever. Whether someone is riding the tube home or going on a family vacation they are never truly safe. Yet people go on with their daily lives putting faith into their government to keep them safe and hoping that is enough.

Operation: A Great Collage of Life, The Walking Tour

A mission statement by: Savannah Bishop

 

            Evidence shows that most major cities are based on one body of water or another. This is true of London, with so much of its life centered around the Thames. Walking toward, along, and across this River the mixture of post-modernistic, modernistic, and pre-modernistic ideals and ideas merge in a great collage of life. Of course, recognizing this first requires actually being able to distinguish between pre-modernity, post-modernity, and modernity. Such is a task easier said than done especially considering the continuously blurring lines between the three ideas.

            Standing in the middle of the Millennium Bridge looking out as far as the eye can see, the easiest item within viewing distance is the Tate Modern. Just judging from the name, we are given the clue that it is not pre-modernistic. Looking inside at the assortment of art: balanced steel plates, human-tripod sculpture hybrid, assortment of large stones, and various other oddities, one can easily see the post-modern sense of perception over traditional representation, the “end of grand narratives that told the truth about the world.”(Lyotard, 1979, p.93)  

            Turning my gaze in the opposite direction St. Paul’s Cathedral looms above me like a long forgotten but still imposing god. Which in many ways it is. If I were to ascribe the notion of pre-modernity to any aspect of the architecture in this area, this Cathedral would be it. This is because modernity moved us from the belief that Gods and Nature were in charge to the notion that humans were, and such a dominant religious structure as the Cathedral is a relic of pre-modernity.

            Looking out at everything else, I have to wonder what building or architecture would encompass the idea of modernity in its entirety. The difficult part in trying to do this is that modernity is so vague and so broad.

            Anthony Giddens defines it most accurately as “a shorthand term for modern society or industrial civilization.”(Giddens, 1998, p.94) Look at any modern city and you will find almost every building exemplifies this. The same is true in this case. Because the lines are so blurred when distinguishing between pre, post and modernity, very few items fit perfectly into one category, the aforementioned examples being the exceptions.

            As I look around me, people rushing past, snapshots of time being saved, buildings just sort of being there, well, this is modernity. This is our society as it is: ruled by nature and gods, natural disasters and churches (pre-modernity), run by people with people running (modernity), and perceived individually by every single one of us (post-modernity).

 

 

Giddens, Anthony. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press. ISBN 0-8047-1762-1 (cloth); ISBN 0-8047-1891-1 (pbk); Cambridge, UK: Polity Press in association with Basil Blackwell, Oxford. ISBN 0-7456-0793-4

Mission: Is It Art?

A Mission Statement by Rebecca Korn

Living in the 21^st century, people have started to question arbitrary things. Consider a lamp, for example. I know a lamp as a standing light source, but someone else might call what I call a lamp a pmal. It is all subjective, and the world you see depends on what you were taught to call certain objects. Everyone sees the world differently based on simple things from gender and race, to the experiences you’ve had in your lifetime. This makes everyone’s reality different, so that when an event occurs, everyone there will have a different account of what happened. Thus, we never really have anything more than opinions. This is innocent enough when it comes to simple things, but when politics comes into play; it becomes a little more complicated. Although everyone may have a different opinion on what exploitation, violence, or terrorism is, it is important to come to a consensus when defining these topics so that minimal debate happens when a situation arises. Although Bauman thinks that, “Individual consumers with volatile identities driven by mediated desires that can never be satisfied, we can never achieve communal solidarity. ‘Divided, we shop,’” (Martin Jay, Liquidity Crisis: Zygmunt Bauman and the Incredible Lightness of Modernity), I believe that it is possible to reach a mutual understanding between people if they are willing to listen to each other’s opinions.

With this background knowledge, I went to the Tate Modern Museum to explore how modern art and postmodern sociology are connected. I observed many abstract paintings, unlike anything you would encounter in the world. It is possible that this is considered modern art because everyone will see the paintings from a different perspective, and no one would have already encountered it in their lives so it scrapes away any preexisting prejudice. Another type of art I encountered were sculptures that loosely represented things in life, like construction. They could be representing the world in these more abstract ways to question its reality. Since everyone sees construction in a different way, it seems fair to represent it in an abstract way so that everyone could still tell what it is, but look at it from a different perspective and get a different opinion on it. However, all of this modern art begged the question: is this really art? Growing up, many people were taught that art is something that takes time, skill, and practice. But when there is a framed piece of gray paper hanging in an art museum, it causes some controversy over whether or not it is art. It does not seem to take any skill or time to make, and it seems like something anyone could do. Therefore, I do not consider this art. However, there must be some people that do consider this to be art because it is hanging in an art museum. This debate over what is art stems from people living in different realities. So, is it art?

Work Cited (in MLA)

 

Jay, Martin. “Liquidity Crisis: Zygmunt Bauman and the Incredible Lightness of

Modernity.” Theory, Culture & Society. Sage Publications, 17 Dec. 2010. Web. <https://blackboard.arcadia.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-1333246-dt-content-rid-1600135_1/courses/FA2013.LONS_SOSC_143.LONS.CGS/Liquidity Crisis.pdf>.

Operation: Discovering Truth at the Tate Modern

A mission statement by Eliana Bernstein

       Does society still believe in truth? Is a mug really a mug? Is the essence, the truth of a mug the same for everyone? A mug has multiple purposes besides being used to drink coffee or tea. So could there be multiple truths to a mug? It can be argued that postmodernism is the end of truth. Postmodernism is the shift in societies comprehension of what is real or what is ‘truth’. Since everyone sees the world around them differently postmodernists believe that there can be no single truth because everyone has different perspective of how the world is constructed around them. This idea means that truth is not everlasting but relative, and if it is relative is it really the singular truth? Postmodernism has created societies in which its citizens cannot identify a truth. For instance the mug has no truth, for some it’s a toothbrush holder while others may use it as a coin jar. Maybe when people stop and analyze the world around them they realize there is no truth, but no one sits in front of a mug analyzing its purpose they just use it. They still use the term mug and in the moment they are not analyzing the function of the mug they accept the truth behind the mug without hesitation. They don’t take a moment to stop and think about its essence but rather go on with daily life. So during one’s life they believe in truth, but once you go to your sociology class and examine truth you don’t believe there is one. Ideas of postmodernism are only brought to the surface when people decide to take time to question truth, but in society we conform to believe in truth. So in society we believed there is a truth to this mug when in fact after analyzing it we discover that the mug does not have truth.

      Walking around the Tate Modern one can find many different forms of art such as per-modern, modern and postmodern art. When looking at postmodern art its hard to seek out an overall truth or message behind the art work. Its as if the artist intended for the viewer to interpret the piece in many different ways and create their own truths about the artwork. Personally I would look at a postmodern sculpture and get one idea about the truth behind it, and then I would read the plaque explaining the piece and realize the artist thought of a different truth behind his/her art work. For example at the Tate Modern I thought one sculpture was a volcano that erupted, but in fact the sculpture was suppose to represent a human body. What I thought was the base of the volcano was actually the person’s arm span and what I thought was ash was actually the persons head. So in this form of art there is no singular truth because to each person the artwork represents something different. In the world around us there is no singular truth because everyone’s perspective is different.

Operation: Teleportation and Assimilation

A Mission Statement by Savannah Bishop

We live in a Global world. But what does that mean? How does this shape our perception of the small, battered, hand held globe that we looked at as children? I remember looking at that globe and trying to find myself on it, and then, after getting bored of that, poking around at different areas that look interesting. I suppose our world is now more global in the sense that I can talk to and travel to those places I once jabbed at with my fingers. And they can talk back.

            The sociological notion of globalization is that “local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa”(Giddens, 1990, p.64) So basically, in subtle and not so subtle-MADE IN CHINA- ways the place I live is shaped by other areas, cultures and economies around the globe. And America shapes them back. I went to France and could order a Hamburger (which is originally German, hence the name, but considered an American invention) and French Fries (which are considered French, hence the name, but originally an American invention) and Escargot (which is really just fancy snails). There is evidence of globalization everywhere I look.

            With a few steps, I can make use of a teleportation device…walk inside a restaurant…and be in an entirely different part of the world. At the tips of my now typing fingers I can talk to someone in Australia, not just to further something important, but because I’m bored. The latter is the idea of a ‘global village’ connecting people around the planet, or even beyond, with telephone wires and Internet waves like a human brain sending electric signals to connect areas around your body. But where is the brain? Globalization doesn’t have a single, distinct, one.

            That, I think, is the interesting bit. A large number of sociologists argue that this increased globalization will compress and intensify the consciousness of the world(Roland Robert, 1992, p.8) and that all people on earth will be incorporated or assimilated into a single, global society(Albrow, 1990, p.45). Personally, I don’t agree. We are communicating more and through before unimaginable channels, dispersing our culture, and having other societies influence our own. Still, this does not in any way mean that we are getting lost in this global society to the extent that everything becomes the same. More so than ever before has the notion of individualism been so prevalent.

Chapter One, Rantanen, T. (2005) The Media and Globalization. London: Sage

 

Operation: End of the World

A mission statement by Eliana Bernstein

It’s the end of the world! At least according to many films our final demise will be caused from environmental scenarios such as hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis or even a combination of all of these natural disasters. Don’t worry because it is highly unlikely that the world will blow up, but climatic changes will certainly make daily life harder. A consequence of accelerating industrial and technological development has created a human intervention into nature (Giddens 66). “Urbanization, industrial production and pollution, large scale agricultural projects, the construction of dams and hydroelectric plants, and nuclear power programs are just some of the ways in which human beings have had impact on their natural surroundings,” (Giddens 66). The average temperature of earth has risen approximately .7 degrees since 1850. Depending on the region you live in climatic changes in the environment can change your life. For example if you live by the sea rising sea levels will soon cause floods. Rising temperature will melt snow and dry up rivers making it hard to get water. Eventually our water source may just disappear. Rising temperatures will also make it impossible to grow crops in certain areas. These climatic changes will increase conflict over resources. Everyone in the world must start trying to prevent these climatic changes. Whether its buy recycling, not using heating in your homes or even using energy saving light bulbs everyone can contribute to help save the environment form climatic changes. By doing this people will also save themselves.

Climate changes have different effects on people depending on where they are living and how wealthy they are. Countries that are wealthy have a better chance to change and adapt to climatic changes. Richer people have a better chance of purchasing expensive and scarcer resource. Poorer people cannot afford these resources and have a harder time adapting to the climate changes in their current living conditions. This will cause them to have to move too more equipped areas. Certain changes that may occur is the low-lying Pacific Islands may become will become useless for farming because of the rising sea levels. On the other hand a few Northern areas will become wetter. Also melting of glacier and mountain snow may occur in Latin America and Asia, which will reduce the available clean drinking water and water used to grow food. The climate changes will make crop production fall in certain areas ,but will increase crop production in other areas. It depends on what the weather does which is unpredictable. The global population is rising and it is estimated that by 2050 the population will be 9 billion people. The population increase will lead to an increase in food demand, which is estimated to rise 14%.

Bibliography (MLA FORMAT)

Giddens, Anthony. Sociology. 4th ed. Cambrige: Polity, 2001. Print.