Drawing Parallels

Miami isn’t necessarily a very “cosmopolitan” community as many of us imagine it to be. We’re divided within different blocks of cultures, where some represent a Latino, African American, or Caucasian population. Every group remains within their neighborhood and the integration of cultures only occurs when a minority can afford a home in the Caucasian area. Our geographic division is further evoked as the Miami population embraces its different cultures, where politics is part of that nature. 

Within my Latino community, my parents’ generation identifies with the Republican Party because the Church urges it strenuously due to the basic principles of its platform (its view on abortion). The title of being labeled “Republican” has never carried a negative connotation within my mind; it always represented the voice of my people.  When my friends on my floor invited me to attend the Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin rally, I assumed it would be similar to home. It was my first (political) reality check.

At first, Martin Luther King Jr. posters greeted the National Mall with a sense of social hope. As I crossed the road towards the Washington Monument, I had my first peak, of what soon turned to be a massive congregation of white supremacists. Children pranced around in their U.S.A flag apparel accompanied by their “No Socialism” stickers and as parents wore “I can see November from my house” buttons on their shirt. I had never been to a rally before, and I felt compelled to try to get closer to the Lincoln Monument to see all the action. My friend and I decided to follow a protesting group in hopes that it would allow us to reach our destination quicker. When the shuffling finally stopped, we confronted a human block.

White Americans were bashing those who protested the rally and different cultural slurs rolled off their tongues as if it was second nature. I finally saw an “Anti Illegal Immigration” sign and knew that I was also being attacked.

I’m not illegal, just so you know, but as a Latina, I know many who are.  From all the illegal immigrants I know, I have never met one that has had the intentions of decreasing the lifestyle of an American. Every story varies, but it will always lead to one main reason: provide the basic necessities back home, wherever it may be.

What my mother assumed a Republican to be was nothing similar to what a Nationalist was back at Honduras. Had my family been supporting the ideas of those who shared hostile sentiment of foreigners?

Where I stand in regards to a political agenda – I do not know yet. I’ve always been compelled by culture and the revolutions of the lower classes. This rally was just the opposite: Reestablishment of authority to a single race.

Despite the cultural shock and the narrow-mindedness of those who surrounded me on Saturday, I was astonished that freedom of expression was respected and sustained throughout the entire rally.  In Honduras, freedom of expression means “vandalism” and “hooliganism.”

The days following the coup de etat in Honduras experienced an extreme rise of La Resistencia (the resistance) who ended up destroying businesses, homes, and different infrastructures (roads, government buildings, etc) as a manner to voice their opposition to the new government. The country was divided between two political parties: Nationalist and Liberal (La Resistencia). Shootings, violent protests, and curfews became part of the Honduran lifestyle, where many people had to survive off their savings and tune in every night to the new government’s news in order to have a sense of what was occurring.

Once elections took place, the country finally reached a balance and returned to “pre-coup-de-etat” mode. Nevertheless, individuals singled out others based on the colors they wore (Red=Resistencia, White=Nationalist), where at times, soccer gangs ended up taking the social tension between the two groups into a physical approach. Every soccer group represented a different political ideology. In the end, the country remained divided until the World Cup. Honduras finally found a source for the people to all be united and share a similar characteristic: their country was finally in the World Cup after 20 or so years of absence.

Now, what was what to happen in the U.S for all of us to be united again? My intention isn’t to leave that as a rhetorical question. At one point, I hope to have a solid basis to answer this question. Part of it will be this course, another will be my AU education, but most importantly, I hope to integrate my culture. 

Honduras

The United States

Moral Dilema

To be honest, I am a bit ashamed of my first reaction to the PEPFAR presentation. After spending the morning speaking of the HIV/AIDS issue on a domestic scale, and being completely floored by the statistics, I was shocked to hear that the US was spending such a large amount of effort and money on the HIV/AIDS global issue with the same problem going on in a domestic level. I felt horrible for thinking it, but shouldn’t we first fix our own issues before focusing on the rest of the world? Don’t get me wrong, I in no way whatsoever feel that an American’s life is more valuable than another human’s life, but it still had me puzzled. In D.C. 3.2% of the population is suffering from HIV/AIDS. Of those people, hundreds are unable to receive treatment. How can the PEPFAR know that thousands of deprived citizens all over the country are struggling to live without medication and still pump out 63 BILLION dollars a year to the rest of the world? Is it easier to get HIV/AIDS medication from a US organization living in Southern Africa than in Washington D.C?

I tried to imagine hearing the presentation as if I was a local resident living with HIV. From that point of view, I couldn’t help but to feel a little irritated. What’s worse, the US is the ONLY country making a significant effort to combat the global HIV/AIDS issue. Not only are we prioritizing non-Americans over our own citizens, we are the only ones doing it!

First reaction aside, I was also incredibly impressed by what I was hearing. I was always familiar with the stereotypes people had about AIDS/HIV patients, and I was very glad to know that a significantly large group of people did care about treating afflicted people. Hearing such negative stigmas about HIV/AIDS victims, I always thought people never gave them the attention/funding they required. Although there is no hope for a cure in the foreseeable future, there is hope that treatment will become more accessible and more lives will be saved.

Reflection: AIDS....or Water?

In the world of deadly maladies, I find AIDS comes second to cancer. But then, even cancer doesn’t rank very high on my priorities list because of the overwhelming poverty in the world. The fact that food and water are scant in as much as (% of the world) pushes AIDS into a far corner of my mind.
I see problems from their origin. The spread of AIDS is correlated to poverty, and poverty is at its worst when food, water, and shelter (the necessities of life) are limited. When food and water are limited, overall health declines. Of course, AIDS can’t be spread with a cough, but generally good health in an area comes with health education (just use condoms—it’s that simple). If one focuses their resources on combating unclean water (or worse—not any at all) then accumulating food will become easier. Once food and water are not so hard to come by, then overall health will improve and more focus can be on working and providing health care. If you’re repairing a shambled building, you don’t start with the top—you build from the bottom.
In addition to focusing resources on the original issues, one could increase the efficiency of combating poverty and the ills that come with it by privatization. Normally the argument against privatization is that businesses are out to make a profit. Of course, that would be the same in the case of a privatized effort against AIDS, but one would assume that if an entrepreneur decided to make a company to do such a thing, his mission isn’t solely to make $1 million personal profit per year. Not only are private industries usually more efficient than public, but it also wouldn’t drain money from the government. We all know our government is in the hole pretty big right now…
Overall, I wasn’t impressed with the two speeches on AIDS. First of all, they were glaringly conflicting in some spots. For instance the first speaker alluded that all AIDS medicine must be refrigerated. This would make combating AIDS quite difficult and costly, as one would have to tote around a cooling system. However, the second speaker at PEPFAR made the idea that all AIDS medicine needed to be refrigerated seem like a silly question! Of course there’s non-refrigerated medicine! This brought up a question of efficiency: Apparently there are different varieties of medicine, so what is the distribution that PEPFAR is using? One would assume that the non-refrigerated variety is more expensive, so is PEPFAR inefficiently using this non-refrigerated variety where they could easily use the refrigerated? How exactly is PEPFAR using their money?

Reflection on AIDS presentation

The main feeling that I would say I had when I walked away from the PEPFAR presentation on AIDS relief in our Wednesday lab was amazement. $32 billion dollars is what stuck in my head throughout that meeting. The reason was that this sum of money was being spent completely on relief outside the United States for AIDS. I knew that in the early stages of PEPFAR we did this as an emergency humanitarian relief act. This I could understand. As so often happens however, it seems we have dug ourselves into a situation where we will have to continually pour money into this fund with little or no help from other nations.

Given our current economic situation, this is simply not a burden we can bear ourselves. We need international support. Before we went to the PEPFAR briefing, I recalled the figures of AIDS infection in the D.C. area. 3.2% of the population is infected with HIV. That is almost the same infection rate as Nigeria. I was relieved to hear we had a similar program in place for combating domestic AIDS problems, but was still thinking that this unilateral approach to the AIDS issue abroad will never be enough and will drain our monetary supply. I was also deeply disturbed to hear about the needle exchange program. Some people shy away from hard drugs like Heroine, because of the stigma of dirty needles, infection, and just the dirty connotation it carries with it. Now they will hear that they can just go and get clean needles, they may feel that it is safer and are more willing to take a risk and consume the drug. In a time where I feel we need to be extremely resolute in our anti-drug message, this program is a way of sanctioning further drug use.

The bottom-line for me is that with the current healthcare crisis we have in our own country, I feel that we can not afford to spend such enormous amounts of money on a global initiative, that so far has been a unilateral approach. We should look at ways to make these areas like sub-Saharan Africa more independent in terms of healthcare and possibly provide benefits and subsidies to NGO's and non-profits that should be the main force in this endeavor, given the rising debt in our government.

Biggest Problem in World Politcs? You’re Living in It.

Hey, America: It’s time to start taking responsibility for your exponentially growing list of international fouls.

The G-20 would unanimously agree that this is certainly not the best of times, and it seems as though international law has been replaced by Murphy’s Law. Yet as the financial system teeters on the precipice of oblivion, we must overcome the shock of sudden instability in order to properly examine what actually happened. I’m not talking about a quick point of the finger at George Bush or Alan Greenspan – I’m proposing a complete review of the “American Dream” as it has been interpreted over the last century. When did this dream stop translating to a single family home with a white picket fence to call your own and morph into a dangerous black hole of greed, violence, and unchecked capitalism? When did Adam Smith’s invisible hand suddenly start wearing brass knuckles?

There is certainly enough blame to be passed around to all sectors of the business cycle. However, in searching for the cause of this great breakdown, deregulation seems to be the primary culprit. While this crisis has been highly politicized, both Democrats and Republicans carry blemished regulatory records. Jimmy Carter began the process of deregulation before the efforts of Ronald Reagan, and soon policymakers advocated self-regulation. Yet in a world driven by greed, self-regulation equates to no regulation. Our intelligent government ended the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, allowing commercial banks to combine with investment banks and insurance companies. We put our faith in internal risk management and market discipline, yet neither exists when the risk takers are making extraordinary profits in the banking industry. But before we let our emotions over foreclosures and negative bank balances lead us to a public lynching of Lloyd Blankfein and poor Jamie Dimon, let’s understand that it was our own government that allowed this meltdown to occur. Don’t let the media or the cunning politicians trick you into believing that Wall Street investment bankers are the only enemy. The world economy is not in shambles because of a few bathroom renovations at Goldman Sachs. We watch as Obama slaps the bankers on the wrist and makes them promise to never do it again, then the cameras are shut off as JP Morgan deposits a fat check in the back pocket of the next campaigning politician.

So as Karl Marx rolls in his grave, the fearless leaders of the United States of America continue to screw up. But here comes the kicker – the one truth that escalates our presence as a greedy and capitalist nation to number one on the list of problems in world politics: the effects of our failed system stretch beyond our shining seas. Our bundles of toxic assets crossed the Atlantic to cripple entire Norwegian cities, while simultaneously tearing down the infallible Euro. Whether we deserve the title or not, the US is a definite “big player” on the world stage. When our economy came to a screeching halt in 2008, so did the sale of generic TVs and microwaves (oops…sorry Hu Jintao), and our misfortune meant international misfortune in the age of globalization. In addition to the short-term negative effects of our banking blunders, America’s threat to international stability will continue to grow so long as the greed machine on Capitol Hill controls foreign policy. I recall a promise made by Barack Obama involving the withdrawal of troops from the Middle East. Does sending tens of thousands of more troops into Afghanistan fulfill that promise? While it may not satisfy the wishes of the crazy, fringe liberals who had the audacity to hope that in fact this Barack guy may not be just another corrupt politician, it certainly appeased General Electric, one of the nation’s top defense contractors AND generous supplier of campaign funds. Stirring up unnecessary wars in already fragile areas of the world is not good for international politics, but it is great for American capitalism. Our politicians are so easily swayed by greed that waving a couple of Benjamins in their faces every so often is enough to push the agendas of lobbies and special interest groups through congress, thus overlooking human rights violations in Palestine and crucial treaties to lessen the effects of global warming. The influence of the US is undeniable, as is the unending list of international catastrophes. Yet until we swallow the antidote to cure this infectious wave of unchecked greed and unregulated capitalism that plagues the nation, our undesirable symptoms will continue to contaminate the world’s economy and political system. Wake up America: for the sake of the globe, ignore the bread and circuses and force the pill down Uncle Sam’s throat.

Tolerance

I knew it was my dark hair and my Latin complexion that made everyone ask, “Are you Mexican?” Of course, this question was followed by a now a familiar routine of – “Is your dad a landscaper? Do you live out on the homestead? Do you speak Mexican?”

After being asked so often, I wondered if I belonged. It seemed like I was an outsider. I didn’t share a common language or culture, but I still lived among the American population. It came to a point in my life where if someone asked where I was from, I would stay quiet or simply respond, “I don’t know.”

It’s not about adopting my customs, but respecting them. It’s reached a point where we’ve started to identify certain groups and associated dehumanizing characteristics and passed it to the youth. Unless we start emphasizing the importance of tolerance of all cultures, our efforts in the war will mean nothing. Tolerance doesn’t mean accepting different ideas, but learning how to listen and respect them. The need to tolerate different ideas will allow countries to maintain their distinctive characteristics and maintain a role in the global community.

The problem with America is that we assume that we’re right. That our policies and government have little to no flaws; that there is no room for other political ideologies to have a say in our global world. Who is to say that democracy is the best form of government? The argument is endless, but the best answer is: It works for the U.S. Every country has a unique social background with people of different cultures, economic statuses, and so forth.

If the manner we approach foreign countries and prospective actions doesn’t change now, when will it? Our ever-so-strong American pride inhibits our ability to distinguish different opportunity costs, and we tend to favor those that match our similar political concepts. My fear is that this behavior not only happens here in the U.S, but in other countries as well. Its due to a continuous cycle of competing for a better system, instead of mixing the stronger ends of both, and reaching a common point, we are fighting it off at the expense of society.

Nationalism isn’t always a unifying force. It can be destructive and hurt our international image, along with further divisions within a country as well. Learning how to intermix such a diverse domestic and international population will be a challenge, but if we start to learn about others and learn how to tolerate different ideas, we can focus on issues that help us protect the human race, rather than destroy ourselves off. It all begins with education.

As an 18 year old college student, I look back at the days when I was accustomed to being called spick, as much as I was used to Diana, and consider that it was not because my classmates had pretentious evil aims, but because there was no education in regards to cultural tolerance. There still isn’t today.

Chinese Military Buildup

In the last decade the People's Republic of China has built up exponentially. For one thing, all males ages 18-22 have compulsory military service. Since they have the largest population in the world, this in itself is a major threat to a country such as the United Sttates who has one of the smallest armies in comparison to its population. China has over three million soldiers ready and able to fight. (CIA Factbook). The United States and Asia as a whole should be concerned about thier buildup. They have been far from loyal allies. They are slow to act on issues with North Korea in terms of sanctions and other solidarity measures with the rest of the U.N. Security Council.

Few People realize it but the Chinese and the U.S. have been involved in a sort of arms race for a long time. In January 2007, China shot down one of its satellites from one of its naval ships because the satellite was decaying in orbit (Washington Post). The United States did the same later that year. AFter the advent of the United States Air Force F-22 Raptor, the Chinese worked on a similar project and have been running tests on an as of yet unnamed advanced aircraft. They are also close to developing their first super carrier. They already possess the ability to sink a United States super carrier according to the Pentagon.

The bottom-line is that very often the Chinese have different goals from the United States and they are reluctant to join the world community in facing difficult humanitarian issues outside and inside their borders. They have gone as far as to sanction cyber attacks upon the White House, Pentagon, and other governmetn agencies. We must be prepared to deal with this. Their national pride and strong military industrial complex will only get stronger as time goes on. We must have a more frank dialogue with them about this issue and prepare ourselves so we can have an effective means of deterrence and influencing things that go on in East Asia.

Sources: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/18/AR2007011801029.html

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html

-Rowland Coleman

The 12018457937429th Problem that the United States Made Worse

Not that I’m comparing the Middle East, North Korea, and India to your average rebellious teenager, but in the scheme of well-established countries with nuclear weapons and industry, North Korea, India, and Middle Eastern countries like Libya, Iran, Pakistan are toying immaturely with very serious machinery. Their seemingly flippant attitude towards the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and precarious testing in oceans near neighboring countries is the most important issue in world politics today because it threatens the lives of innocent citizens. Mostly because of terrorism.

Iran breaks more rules than the number of pant-suits in Hilary Clinton’s closet. The IAEA was created to ensure the safe use of anything nuclear—a well intentioned body. Yet still Iran dubs the IAEA “illegal”, violates safeguards, and enriches as much uranium as it pleases. Iran refuses to comment on the facilities that clearly have no use for anything other than bomb building. When the UN and United States do not sufficiently reprimand Iran, other nations attempt to slide by the rules themselves. Rules only work when they’re enforced.

China, while not a rule breaker in terms of nuclear policy itself, petulantly sells (or gifts) nuclear reactors to other nations, such as Pakistan, as a jab at the United States. However, the United States can’t realistically comment (or punish China for supplying nuclear reactors to taboo countries like Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea), because the United States forced the NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group) to exempt India from the protocols that everyone else had to follow. If the U.S. broke a rule for India, China can break it for Pakistan in just another show-down of political clout. China has further supplied Pakistan with the design of a missile-mounted warhead, which has somehow made it’s way into Libya, Iran, and one can only imagine where else! In addition, North Korea hides behind “civilian nuclear work” and then tests bombs in South Korea’s backyard.

I’m not insinuating that nuclear weapons and power shouldn’t be allowed in the world because they are the Ace of Spades when it comes to weapons and energy solutions. Nuclear weapons and their counterparts for nuclear energy (such as Uranium) should just be highly regulated so as not go get in the wrong hands (read: terrorists).


http://www.economist.com/node/16426072?story_id=16426072