Reoriental and Transformative

"Why are we talking about this?"

A man dreaded with wisdom and youth mentioned that the topic of a Florida pastor burning the Koran on the anniversary of 9/11 addresses a classroom in the Appalachian highlands of university-age students because of our place in the top 2% of educated persons; that, our knowledges about topics personally-removed from us reflect our education and capacity for handling the situation thoughtfully.

Several tangents seeded onward from our discussion:

Regarding General Petraeus' and his regards for Mr. Jones' plans for Saturday, I wonder who Jones intends to target with this act. Our reasons for being in Iraq and Afghanistan are muddled, but support for armed forces has been rather clear cut--at the very least, support embodies value for human life (an odd paradox of military thought is a basic value for human life--i.e. armored vehicles ). I want to consider all parties invested in this act, who may be responsible for the reverberations. The very idea that General Petraeus appointed a comment to represent the armed forces on 'tour' necessarily draws a greater concern for this event than I originally imagined. In the event that an intent receives a wider escalation than planned, and what's more, in ways drawn further from the control deck of the idea then preventative measures must be considered. Clearly, this idea is hitched on an inability to withdrawal, on public persecution one way (for following through) or another (for backing down). While our reasons for war-time engagement may be neither here nor there (but if at all, reasons are mostly 'there'), our military involvement is most fundamentally so that private individuals do not feel the need to avenge a national crisis of insecurity. 9/11 invoked a nation-wide sense of insecurity.

As far as negating the ridiculous nature of this conflict, that is making news of a congregation of 50 in a sinkhole of Florida burning the sacred text of another congregation, how can we reflect the sentiment that this will occur completely out of context with the rest of the educated North American populace for the foreign audience under General Petraeus' authority and thereafter? Several of my colleagues declared a call of duty for all those who do not share Jones' ignorance to show by way of public protest that while this mindset may flow through mainstream media it a showcase of the minority. Others thought that we should let this man stand alone all by his self, enforce restrictions on broadcasting this event; in short, to engage as bystanders innocent by non-association. To this regard, a lady to my left mentioned that negligence of this sort will only increase structural violence: "he will become one of us when 'us' does not exclude him." I remain within the inquisition of earlier reference: Since our serving general is involved, how do we reflect the radical nature of this man without infringing on his right to express his feelings?

We ended of course with a call for transformation. This event may be formative of future events, and therefore we need to draft a way to dissolve our present (potentially) of all forms of violence, no matter how ridiculous.

Bredth

"Accelerating globalization of cultural, technological, economic, and demographic flows is rapidly and profoundly transforming the institutions that produce and disseminate knowledge (Friedman, 2001, p. 504)...Underlying the calls for an interdisciplinary component to liberal education is the recognition that interdisciplinary study encourages 'breadth of vision and the development of the skills of integration and synthesis so frequently demanded by the problems of a culture in the midst of a profound transition' (Newell & Green, 1982, p. 23)." (40)

Allen Repko, Interdisciplinary Research: Process and Theory, 2008

White? Black? Other? (Who is "Other"?): Part 3 of 3

"Emmanuel Levinas and S.T. Coleridge: Judaic and Romantic Approaches to Ethics, Politics, and Otherness"

7 p.m. Thursday, Nov. 12,, in Room 114 Belk Library

As sponsored by the Center for Judaic, Holocaust, and Peace Studies.

[Haney is the author of two books on Romanticism that draw on the work of Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas. He will consider how Levinas’s post-Holocaust notion of a subjectivity based on a radical otherness can be interpreted alongside Coleridge’s struggle to formulate a new philosophical relationship between self and other in the early 19th century. Both authors, For additional information, call 2311, e-mail to holocaust@appstate.edu, or visit www.holocaust.appstate.edu]

On this thursday night I walked into an auditorium fit to seat 100, albeit only 7 or so chairs were filled. To Dr. Haney we were students, fellow colleagues, and a wife, and he held the look of a man who knew a lot spare a place to begin. When the bells rang in alarm, Dr. Haney began with an introduction to himself and his academics. The night was to progress through a brief powerpoint presentation, which served as a backdrop of definitions, a reading of his essay on "Otherness", and a casual conclusion with just enough time for questions and cookies.

In an attempt to have his words serve as he intends, the definitions Dr. Haney primes us with are very helpful. For example, because he is presenting Levinas through his own words, a critique, he begins his presentation with a quote from Richard Cohen, outlining his purpose and standard for criticizing:

“What criticism does is to interpret a text by explaining it in terms of more or less remote objective contexts. . . . "

Cultural Values are values that render the recognition of similitude when one culture is placed aside another. Applying values to one culture or another is a way of affirming, applying, and achieving alterity. By rationalizing with the force of man from the eye of an other, one is in turn forever locking that man into a category-- a violent measure of a man as hostage in a time, place, and act that he himself once realized and was observed in being. Dr. Haney goes on to explain that upholding justice in a situation between man and his other (a being separated from the actual person himself very much like framing a replica of an original piece of art) would only act as an extreme account of concern for ethics and security. For Levinas, in other words, the way in which modern man accounts for a just state of governing--as a formation by rule--is indeed a contradiction.

It is here that we begin to see the connection of a philosopher within his frame of Nazi Germany, WWII, The Cold War, and thereafter.

In a mild diversion from Levinas, Dr. Haney invests a hot minute within the head of Immanuel Kant. For Kant, persons act not as means to an end, but are indeed the end themselves. There is a paradox embedded within the call for equal rights for all humankind while maintaining human beings to be authentic with uniqueness and individuality.

"What we are beginning to see is a process of moral will--a distinction given to the race of history, not of science; a claim as The Historic Race."

Humankind strives through the multi-tiers of a cast system with hope of finally reaching the summit: Pure Equality. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is criticized for being an ideal, and unrealistically optimistic. Without voicing refute, The United Nations reasoned that the document articulates a concrete goal in a form readily accessible to every person of every race and every age the world over. Moreover, the declaration exudes an image of humans rising above the instincts to be inhumane; of man to be in himself apart from his instinct, his outlet of unique being (i.e. genocide). By expressing that humans possess equal rights, one is in turn using a kind of "dialectal productiveness between cultural differences". There is violence in the freedom to choice, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees that freedom while also authorizing freedom in one leveling sweep. In the end, The Declaration enables homogeny for a man whose will is inconsistent with the will of his neighbor and the "other" of his observations.

Bottom line: Humans are free agents governed by the rules and regulations of a sport which guarantees the success of the game.

By preserving the game one in turn preserves the employment of the referee. Levinas disagrees with the creation of the United Nations and their involved work because both apply, affirm, and achieve a system of tiers, and more importantly maintain our involvement with an endless system of ascent.

Some sidelining thoughts that came after his presentation as answers to an inquisitive congregation:

Ethical Reading:

When reading a text, you are speaking with it as it is maintained by its unique position--a position that you create for it by placing said text in conversation (even if only in cranial converse). By picking up another text--related or unrelated--you are having them read each other. The conclusion? Reading is always immoral because we are always applying our philosophy du jour to our conversation with a text. Moreover, reading is always political, comparable, and never ethical.

Fiscally, managerially responsible:

When applying a budget to a man in a position below your nose, you have to work carefully not to imply that "I have you figured out." A larger budget for one department (say of football) over another (say that of cheerleading) would imply a certain equation of worth, need, and capability.

Some modern -ology: Peace and War

"War resembles disease primarily because it has threatened or brought physical damage or death to large populations. Thus, the yearbook of world health statistics, published by the World Health Organization (1976), includes "injury resulting from operations of war" in its list of 150 cause of death. War's opposite--peace--is like the opposite of disease--health--in that it implies the preservation and extension of human life.

The traditional view of war, like that of disease, related the supernatural and natural orders.

Modern African warfare still incorporates traditional war charms, rites of passage, and sorcery. It involves the spirit of a mystical community. Thus, in a symbolic novel about the Biafran war of secession, the Court of the Here-After hears that millions of men have died "in the dignity of kinship." "Yes," says the prosecuting Counsel for Damnation, "death is indeed an exercise in pan-Africanism. We have been known to kill each other partly because we belong to each other. We kill each other because we are neighbors."

Peace science has not yet advanced to the point of professional practice. Although the military claim that "peace is our profession," the primary emphasis of the contemporary peace movement is still religious, its leaders, figures like Ghandi and Martin Luther King. A more comprehensive peace profession, supported by a firm knowledge base in peace science, is still a hope rather than a reality."

The Epidemiology of Peace and War
Francis A. Beer
International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Mar., 1979), pp. 45-86
Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The International Studies Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2600274

Public works!(?): Afghanistan...asking the hard questions

“…the best way to overcome widespread public opposition in Europe was to demonstrate progress in the war, which could be accomplished by turning over control to Afghan forces in areas where the security situation is good.” Rasmussen

“Obama said Tuesday that by setting a date for withdrawal, he was trying to create added momentum for building up the capacity of the Afghan government and its security forces.

“The absence of a time frame for transition would deny us any sense of urgency in working with the Afghan government,” Obama said during his speech. “It must be clear that Afghans will have to take responsibility for their security, and that America has no interest in fighting an endless war in Afghanistan.”"

The opposition: “It could take years and years more,” McGovern told NPR. “I think sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan will make it 30,000 times harder to get out of this mess.”

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), called the plan “an expensive gamble to undertake armed nation-building on behalf of a corrupt government of questionable legitimacy.”

The Taliban responded Wednesday by saying the White House plan would only make it fight harder. In a statement, the hard-line Islamist militia said it was “committed to increasing the number of mujahedeen [holy warriors] and strengthen[ing] their resistance.”

(US soldiers are fighting holy warriors. Who has the right to resist and for what reasons are we resisting one another? What is our quarrel with one another, and why are we as enemies only marked by qualms? What was characteristic of the enemies from our history?

Does the US stand to provide alms, whereas the Taliban stands to claim territory?)

“During the first eight months of 2009, there were nearly 13,000 enemy-initiated attacks in Afghanistan — more than 2 1/2 times the number reported in the same period in 2008, according to Pentagon data.” What else could reason for this increase in attacks?

NPR “Afghan Plan Faces Tough Questions on Capitol Hill”

"What, if any, conditions would need to be met to begin drawing down troops by the july 2011 target date?
Is the withdrawal condition based?"

By placing more marines in Afghanistan, will they outnumber their Afghan counterpart?
Most men fighting in Helmand, Afghanistan were 10, 11 years old when the trade centers fell--what kind of reaction can you expect from the boys and girls in Afghanistan and Iraq now? --In other words, does the Taliban today encompass a reactory group of previously impressionable 10, and 11 year olds sitting on the other side of 9/11's wake?

Al Qaeda changed after 9/11 attacks upon the CIA's classic "full-fury America!" reaction. The group began to act as a brand that only needed to sell terrorism. By marketing that Muslims suffer because America props up repressive regimes.
Does a claim of insanity ever warrant a victim his legitimate grounds for making others as victims? Is a claim of insanity reason for a large scale terror attack; or relinquish a man of his punishment due to his inability to "help himself"? How would you diagnose, characterize, identify, those who buy and wear Al Qaeda? --as victims, as criminally insane, as terrorists?

An affair to remember: part 2 of 3

2 days prior to Labor Day, and just a day shy of the Day of Rest, I shared a day with my mentor family as arranged by the International Rescue Committee over the summer. Although my experience with this family extends through my employment at the IRC, the event I wish to illustrate took place between 10AM and 3PM Saturday, September 5th in a room outfitted within the metro atlanta suburb.

The family includes the mother, Rajaa, the father, Abdel, a little girl, Marianne, and two young boys, Yousef and Ameen. While the family seeks refuge from the quarrels of Iraq, the children were born while Rajaa and Abdel were stationed as asylees in Jordan and most recently, in Syria.

Our morning progressed through puzzles, pretzels, and tea. The mother, Rajaa, has a limited understanding of English, and invited a Sudanese woman living in the same complex to come over. Our guest worked in several embassies as a translator for Arab-English conversations after attending college some years ago. Her disposition was kind and very intentional, and her presence was of great help for our conversations.

As the children plowed through the puzzle I brought in tow, Rajaa, her friend (whose name I cannot recall), and I "met as women". The Sudanese woman shared with me that it is common place for the women to talk over tea, and that our visit was to carry on in no exception. Mostly, we talked about our families. While I thought my family of six to be of impressive size, Rajaa's family took trump. To paint a picture, Rajaa is a very strong Arab woman and she currently stands to match her husband barrel belly for barrel belly--she's pregnant! The urgency of a woman to have children comes from Iraq she told me. Rajaa's mother and household matriarch stands with 85 grandchildren to her name. 85! I thought such number to be serious misunderstanding--a number mixed in translation, but our tea-time translator confirmed the remark.

Well, morning turned to noon and Abdel returned to a house laced with the smells of slow-roasting lamb, fried rice and potatoes--lunch! By this time our morning's guest had returned home to prepare lunch for her husband, the children had showered and dressed for lunch, and Rajaa had bowed in prayer. Since I was well aware of the income of an unemployed refugee I intended to leave before lunch. Also, I was a vegetarian and quite unsure about how to explain such reality without being disrespectful and within the margins of her limited vocabulary. Although I thought my pre-lunch departure was an act of kindness and respect, Rajaa felt just the opposite and insisted that I stay for a meal.

She adorned the table with plates, platters, onions, and olives ("veryyy old, from Syria" she explained) while Ameen, age 3, serenaded us with a song and dance routine. He was quite the charmer and ever so entertaining! When his song ended, we sat down for lunch with Rajaa and I seated at the table's ends. Even though the smell of meat still filled the air, Rajaa aborted the dish -- much to Abdel's dismay.

As we finished our plates the children ran upstairs for an afternoon nap, and Rajaa begin to clean the table. Abdel waved me into the living room and Rajaa later joined us equipped with three cups of orange soda. We talked about Iraq, about starting a new home in the United States, and about the soon-to-be new addition to the family. After some time, Abdel rose in excitement and retrieved a film depicting the crucifixion of Christ. He placed it in the old VHS player at the end of the room and pressed play. The video was confusing for several reasons:
1.) I'm not Christian, and neither are Abdel and Rajaa
2.) The language was Farsi--one in which was foreign to all 3 of us
3.) Why?

At the close of the film, I had the impression that I was imposing upon Abdel's nap time. I packed away the puzzles, books, and colored pencils, and Rajaa and Abdel saw me to the door. Sharing smiles of pearly whites, we said our goodbyes and good evenings.

The global scope hones in on and concludes with one thought. In the few visits I have shared with this family I have come to articulate a question:
How do I act among a family displaced in a country that invaded, now occupies, and promises reconstruction for their own country of origin?
While I never felt like the question was at the forefront of our relationship, it was indeed the parameters for our introduction. Thus far, I have not an answer.

An Informative International: a 3 part experience

Consider our class when each person raises his or her hand in offering of their unique world view. There is an odd network of information working towards an environment of absolute efficiency, and one built with every regard to the individual according to his and her every tongue and taste. The tongue is common to man, and the taste that dictates a mans choice in meal is unique to him and it matures, changing at the very least. In other words, there is a clear international presence in our every day classroom cited under the simple fact that a topic international in scope requires an international interaction, engagement, perspective.

To explain how I plan to complement our assignment to attend an international event and write on it in analysis, I ask only for you to consider the reaction to Germany and the Nazi officials. With World War 2 at a close and the loss waged in said war still under calculation, any kind of leader no matter his faction and governing ideology could grasp the importance of dignity for all parties involved. The race of German soldiers, of German citizens, and of German victims were topics for the court, for migration, and in books of interest. In other words, the syntax of race won precedence over the syntax of the nation and the same idea applies to our classroom. Each one of us has an experience as a part of the course, "Global Issues" but also as a part of different fields--at different ranges. One guy has an experience with politics as a political conference asked him into a new state and eventually to return and appear in court in said state. Another girl has passed a day in Japanese mall while Obama played on TV. Through a wide range of mediums (whether literature, film, judicial system...), each of us cultivates an intercultural experience, and for the most part, represents said experience when placed before a tunnel of conflict foreign in familiarity.

What should be done to solve set issue, for instance? How do both sides weigh in on the conflict? To an extent I could pick up several newspapers and attempt to understand world events through ulterior perspectives, but my presence as an international is not clear until placed within the context of debate among my peers.