Energy Readings

How America is Losing up to 40% of its Food from Farm to Fork to Landfill

·      The numbers say it all. The amount of food the world wastes is surprising but then again, not so surprising. I think it’s the reality we have come to live in. of course Americans didn’t know the ramifications of their actions when food became an international industry, nor did they intend to be responsible for waste the resources needed for this type of food production. Unfortunately, it is ultimately our responsibility to change the direction of this problem.

Top 10 Energy Pigs in the Plug

·      I had no idea that plug loads accounted for 15% of all residential electricity consumptions and 20% of all commercial consumption. I think it would be good to educate people on this issue, especially in the context of our current economy. I don’t know if this is just me, but my main problem with continually plugging and unplugging devices such as microwaves and T.V.s is that you have to reset the device's information every time. (I may just be technologically inept though!)

Americans Waste $130 Billion a Year on Energy

·      I think that though it’s great we have made some progress to lowering energy waste, a big part of the problem is just making sure people understand the consequences of their energy consumption. Like Gunther notes, it’s not as exciting as “electric cars...or solar panels”, but it's equally if not more important. I myself had a hard time understanding the units of measurement in this report, just because I am not familiar with the science behind it. I think it’s important to help people really understand their consumption and inspire people to do something. As with any issue, if enough people got upset, their lawmakers would be more inclined to appease their constituency’s desires. They key to making that happen is by getting people to care.

Capitalism, Coffee

I enjoyed watching Living with Coffee. It was very interesting to put a face to the coffee I pick up on the way to class (almost) every day. And while I think it was good to really understand what goes into making this product, it more importantly pointed out that Free Trade only accounts for a small percentage of the coffee produced worldwide. I think that educating more coffee producers will help them understand not only that they deserve to be paid more, but how to make that happen.

I also enjoyed reading Conscious Capitalism. I completely agree that capitalism has been the greatest man-made invention in history in that free-enterprise capitalism is completely voluntary and creates prosperity, which does in effect make the world a better place. There is less world hunger, there are more girls getting an education, and building stable communities. However, I feel that Whole Foods is an exception to this rule. The truth is, more often than not businesses are only in it for self-serving, rather than community-serving, purposes. And while actions have been taking to adjust this behavior, both capitalists and governments have chosen to lay their loyalty with the self-serving few over the well-being of the many. I hope that other businesses can look to Whole Foods as a representative ambassador to free-enterprise capitalism.

The Price of A Bargain, Readings and Documentaries

The most shocking thing to me was seeing how little Chinese workers are paid and how unethically these products are made. In America, we are used to wage, hour and labor laws and we are used to those laws being upheld. A lot of people do not realize that the jeans they bought were made by a 12 year old during a 15 hour shift with limited bathroom breaks. Wal-Mart has become the "China" of companies. They have excelled at supply-chaining, and they encourage global collaboration, and stay up-to-date on technology that allows them to be the most efficient company ever. Though I do think Wal-Mart customers should know where their products are coming from, it is in Wal-Mart's best interest not to tell them. It is not the customer's responsibility to change how Wal-Mart manufactures their products. However, there has been customer backlash over the last decade or so upon learning that the products they bought were made in, well, un-American conditions. And rather than standing up for these workers' rights, they have been continually lazy about actually forcing Wal-Mart to make a change.

War on Terror Readings

Ignoring the lessons of 9/11:
"Critical thinking became a mark not of conscientious thinking but of dangerous disloyalty."
I completely agree with Jensen's argument in this article- that as a global powerhouse, the United States feels entitled to an aging notion of American imperialism. U.S. policymakers used the attacks as an excuse to start a war with "terror" (a concept- not a country). They pounced on Americans while they were weak and spiritually broken, just as men go after women when they are at their most vulnerable. At a time when Americans came together and united as a country (and should have been allowed to do so in peace), their own leaders marketed their American spirit and unity to rationalize an illegal war. In my eyes there were two big failures here: 1) U.S. policymakers failed to recognize that the time of American Imperialism is fading (big surprise there) and 2) that American journalists failed to do their jobs, which includes being critical of whatever political decisions are made regardless of emotional turmoil the country is experiencing. Essentially, journalists are not here to be our national cheerleaders and life coaches. They are here to report unbiased (in this case, American or anti-American) news. I have to ask, if 9/11 never happened, would America have found another excuse to go to war? Or would the war never have happened?

Buying the War:
I was most fascinated by the scene featuring the White House press, where specific journalists were called on and asked a prescribed question. Not only did the questions asked during the press conference ignore the discussion of he ramifications of the war and what they would honestly mean for America, they chose to take a human interest angle and talk about President Bush's faith. Good for him for having faith in America but the press conference was so completely staged and didn't answer any logistical or pragmatic questions. This kind of vague, amorphous propaganda made it easy for the U.S. government to so quickly and insensitively market the American people's moment of unity.

Framing the War on Terror:
"...the War on Terror was more than a policy label; it was a powerful organizing principle and, to the extent that journalists shared that way of structuring the world as indicated in the reports and analysis, create favorable news discourse climate for military action in Iraq." Journalists latching on to phrases of any kind is always a problem, because it frames people's ideas, promoting narrow-minded thinking and unquestioned politics. A phrase used by reporters over and over again can easily change the life of millions of people- that is why it is so crucial that they choose their words carefully. By referring to the war as "the war on terror" repeatedly, reporters structured the way the world thought about why America chose to illegally invade Iraq. The entire thing just seemed like a staged production with plenty of photo-ops along the way. Turns out, it was. On the other hand, it is difficult for journalists not to be sensitive during a national crisis. 9/11 is still a hugely emotional experience for me and I'm sure millions of other Americans. Re-watching those planes crash into the World Trade Center is a horrible sight. However, I still feel that there is a time and place to be political. And as a reporter, that place is at home.

Is Anyone Responsible?

I think that unfortunately, with a nightly news show reporters have a very short amount of time. I don't think people should really expect the nightly news to work towards more "thematic" coverage, because there are other sources available to that purpose such as magazines or online articles.

However, I think that news reporters have a tremendous effect on how people interpret the news, therefore affecting the sociocultural ideas we surround ourselves with. For example, I was talking with a friend today and she mentioned that during television news, reporters never refer to President Obama as "President" Obama. Rather, they just refer to him as "Obama." She explored the idea that because t.v. reporters repeatedly referred to President Obama this way, he was not as respectable or important as past presidents in the eyes of the public.

In the video clip below, Jon Stewart discusses Ron Paul being ignored by television reporters. It demonstrates how much power news reporters have. Their word choice can turn into something bigger, in this example its the "top tier", which Ron Paul is consistently left out of. It's a funny clip, watch if you're interested!

The Quiet Crisis

While I do agree that some progress has been made since this was written, I have to agree that the U.S. is beginning to lag behind in science and math education. But with everything that the government could do to relieve the U.S. of this "quiet crisis" such as donate money or start programs, I think that a huge part of this effort lies heavily on the shoulders of America's public school teachers. Elementary teachers spend more time with children than anyone (other than their parents) and have a tremendous effect on the attitudes of generations of children. I could not relate more to Meleena's memory of hearing "what am I ever going to use this for in real life?" in regards to math and science classes. And when I think of it, not one of my teachers ever backed up their end. It seemed like they were just there to teach, simply because math and science have always been taught in public school, and not because math and science are currently the most critical classes in regards to America's future. Of course, it is difficult to make children understand the concept that if they work hard at math and science, they could have an enormous impact on our standing in global society.

I would also like to point out that, though increasing numbers of foreign (mostly Asian) entrepreneurs are still coming to America to start their companies. I think that until the majority of Americans start going oversees on entrepreneurial ventures, the power shift won't happen. I think we still have time to turn this around, but I do agree that something needs to be done.

Possibly, Americans are getting too comfortable "at the top", but what other countries think of as "leisurely activities" we think of as inherently American pastimes. The idea of America (currently) is built around leisure, rather than work. I don't think America has an intelligence problem, I think we have a motivational problem. I think that as long as we are aware of our economic competitors, we will take the actions necessary to stay at the top.

Thought this might be relevant... 

Reuters article on China hacking the New York Times

China and the U.S.

-->

I think there are a few reasons why China is seeking a larger global presence but is not seeking to become a world superpower. Firstly, it is human nature to want to improve and continually move forward. I feel that in order for China to grow as a country, improving their environment and working conditions of their people, they would do well to be put on a metaphorical “global pedestal”.

China has made an effort to learn from the mistakes of other world powers. Part of China’s goal to become a world presence has made them focus extensively on analyzing other countries' failures and learning from them. Thus, within the past decade China has gone from being a closed society to being a global helping hand, improving their image around the world, including with the U.S.

“Each time a new problem surfaces, China looks for advantage in it, assuming that it must adapt to the world, not shape the world as it wishes. America believes the opposite.”

Mahbubani argues that “the international political of the 21^st century will for the first time in human history constitute a system that is simultaneously global in scope and less than wholly western in character. The decisions that affect the world can no longer be made in a few Western capitals, as new cultural and political perspectives are entering the scene.” I think this is a reflection of how technology has brought the world together and brought third-world countries into consideration. More and more, geopolitical decisions will be discussed by world powers other than the U.S. An eastern influence will become present. I also think that as our generation grows into a group of professionals who are more socially and globally aware than their baby boomer counterparts, they will be more comfortable making these decisions overseas as new cultural and political perspectives come into play.

And while the chapter was decidedly biased in its assessment of the U.S. during 9/11 and the crisis-swept years that followed, I don’t think Mahbubani is completely off-based when he criticizes the U.S. for its foreign affairs policies during those years.

“American never misses and opportunity to miss an opportunity.”

I think it is natural for a country that wants to improve their image to take an opportunity to do so if they can.

Youth's Perspective Aligns with European Views

-->

First of all, I'm finally able to (b)log in! (Pun intended.)

Second of all, I think that it is ridiculous to look at history four years at a time, and then be disappointed that there hasn’t been more change. It takes an extraordinary amount of time for people to truly change their views on what are considered “controversial” institutions in our society.

I think that president Obama’s election and reelection have drastically changed how the world views our nation, as it signaled a public, proud and poignant end to the racist genocide we carried out within the past three hundred years. European countries were able to see that are not only changing, but also capable of change. However, because of our international image of a unilateralism, military views on social institutions such as religion and homosexuality, I think it is normal that they remain weary of the U.S. The only progressive part of our country is our demand for democratic nations around the world.

I think the article made a good point in noting that the younger generations are promoting a more and more progressive view, and older beliefs will eventually die out. I think this is partially due to the fact that Americans did not think of themselves as “regressive” until the social media phenomenon that has changed the world in recent years.

This country was founded on the principle that people would have sexual, religious, and civil freedom. I feel that some Americans still do not fully understand the extent of those foundations.

The Rest of the West

Kishore Mahbubani illustrates that despite the dramatic progress the world has made in the 19^th century, the underlying construction of power relationships has not changed significantly either in the “hard military and economic dimensions or the new soft dimensions of cultural and intellectual power”. I agree with this point, but I feel that he was slightly dismissive towards the progress the world has made. He is really only focusing on the past two centuries, so I feel that a certain amount of patience is necessary here. Two centuries is really a split second of time on the large scale.

He expresses the consequences of interdependence: we have a common stake in each other’s economic well-being, which is either good or bad. Countries are forced to pay attention to each other, essentially. On a positive note, interconnectedness has begun the process of integrating the third world into the modern world. Slowly, Mahbubani expresses, we are including third-world countries into the future. Environmentally we are interconnected by natural disasters and disease. I feel that though he is surely correct in his statement that interdependence in inevitable, growing interdependence and changing economic realities will not be the only forces reducing western domination, and I feel that he could have further illustrated his point with more examples.

Mahbubani argues that in the 21^st century, for the first time in centuries, we will have a two way street in the flow of ideas values and people. He concludes that the West will remain vibrant and vital, but as part of this continuing dynamism the West will itself undergo a drastic renovation. It will have a smaller influence of the new interdependent world. He writes, “western ideas and technology will enable other societies to accumulate enough affluence and luxury to rediscover their own cultural roots.” I agree entirely with this particular point, and I enjoy the idea that a “two-way-street” of cultures, ideas and people will be a part of both ours and the rest’s futures.