December 15, 2004
-
Topic: Ruminations
Yesturday I re-discovered Aaron Karo (www.aaronkaro.com). He began writing ruminations in college, that got e-mailed all over the place. Now, he does stand-up, and has 2 books out. He’s definately funny and smart as hell…but how did he make it where he is? Maybe it was his consistancy, or charisma? I wonder if I lack the traits to get my book published, or if more persistance will eventually get me where I hope to be. I also suck at public speaking, and I wonder if that will doom me, or if that will go away.
I’ve been thinking a lot about ganryu from xangaland…who is smarter than pretty much most people I’ve met in my life. And he said something interesting recently, that he’s learned not because of school, but “despite school.” So…what makes someone smart? Apparently, skipping class but reading a lot seems to be a good recipe for success.
Reading Zinn made me smart. I consider myself to be a critical thinker, but in many cases, I simply lack the knowledge to be smart. I try to read the Times, but I realize that I’m lacking so much background to really understand what I’m reading, to place it in a bigger context, and draw my own conclusions. I’ve recently learned a bit about social security. I’ve just finished a book on No Child Left Behind. If you were to put my knowledge of the world on a grade level, I’d put it on a high school level. Grasping history, politics, and economics, at least the basics, these are things that can be achieved by the age of 17, and they’re things that I’m now striving to grasp.
The American Democracy Project I’m working on has me focussing on, “what are civic skills and actions.” I’m thinking it’s the knowledge that matters above all. W’re more comfortable saying, “leadership is important,” and “voting is important,” but put less to no value on things like, “knowing the histoyr of US military action is important” or “knowing the history of workers, blacks, women, native americans, and other less powerful groups is important.”
People are not civically engaged primarily because they lack the knowledge of why they should be engaged. For example, we’ve watered down voting to, “Vote because it’s important,” or “It’s your responsibility to vote.” That’s not very compelling to me or most youth. If we focussed on knowledge, people would vote. Why don’t young people vote? Because we’re largely ignorant of issues worth voting for. Suddenly, we get older, health care and jobs become relevant issues, and we vote. Give young people the knowledge and experiences and they’ll vote alright. But, since the 2 major parties rarely satisfy most voters, we may see voting numbers going to green party, libertarian, or socialist candidates.
Take an eligable voter who doesn’t vote because, “politics doesn’t effect me…my vote doesn’t count anyways.” Then give that voter knowledge about poverty and foreign policy, and see if they vote. Not out of duty or responsibility, but because they believe in a cause. People vote because they have a cause to vote for. A cause is an effort to address injustice, truth, or an idea. In order to believe in a cause, a voter must have the knowledge of injustice, of lies, or of an idea.
A civically engaged society (however we define that) is first and foremost an informed society.
Does apathy, or non-involvement, correlate to ignorance? If someone doesn’t care, is it likely they simply don’t know?
Why was the 2004 election the most important in our lifetime? Why did so many people care about voting? Because they knew more about politics than ever before? And why was this? Two reasons I can think of is Michael Moore (Fahrenheit 9/11 and Dude, Where’s My Country) and Jon Stewart (The Daily Show). By showing us the news we don’t always see, and making it entertaining, these two people enlightened our nation.
People act, in many instance, becaue they believe something to be wrong, or in order to support something they believe to be right. Those who bemoan (I’ve never used that word before, bemoan, I kind of like it) Thos who bemoan a lack of civic engagement believe a strong democracy requires an engaged citizenry. The research I’ve seen divideds the pre-requisites of civic engagement into skills, knowledge, and motivation. Most of the focus I’ve noticed so far is on skills, which tend to be very vague (leadership, the ability to write a letter, critical thinking, etc.) or the focus is on the act of engagement itself. ex) voting is good. service is good. But…they tend to ignore controversy, such as protest is also good.
I believe it is the most important pre-requistie to civic engagement that is the weakest. KNOWLEDGE
An ignorant society, versus one that is well-versed in history, politcs, and social issues, is a society that will be engaged. All things being equal, I would assume more people vote in war time because people become somewhat informed about the working of politics. In 2008, I would anticipate numbers to drop as the one thing people became informed about, terrorism, the war in Iraq, WMD, suddenly vanish, and the issues on the table, social security, the economy, education, are the issues that people know little about, and don’t have cause to vote for.
Comments (4)
I wasn’t in South Africa recently. I work at a not-for-profit and I was handling a deadine project in South Africa. Due to the time difference and constraints, I basically accomodated them via their time as well because it’s always better to clarify via phone rather than send an e-mail out and wait an entire day for the answer to one simple question. Most often, the people were literally running around on the Ivory Coast to Mali to Malawi to Zambia so it’s not like in America where everyone has a working mobile, accessible land phones galore, and internet access, faxes, printers, and scanners 24-7. But the Cape is beautiful–I’ve been there ages ago. They also have a bazillion Holiday Inns in what is considered the major European vacation spots–Durban and Cape Town. Sort of like the Americans’ version of Hawaii and the Caribbean.
P.S. Ganryu has a point. He’s learned despite of school. Schools can institutionalize you as does the social structure we are shoved into. It is why there are six-year-old girls from the bible belt who calmly announce into 60 Minute camera lenses that they were sinners since birth and was a born again Christian at age two.
Reading and exploring as much as you can–even if you disagree with the content, it’s part of attempting to be a more aware individual–or to evolve to a new plateau of perception regarding the world around you. But you also need to live and learn by error.
P.S. You don’t have to be charismatic to be a great published writer or become a stellar orator to sell books. Publicity people will actively promote their prettiest and most charming authors the hardest to push the selling point. And sadly, sometimes, it’s not literary content but this “Will it be a next best seller?” sense in book publishing which is rather frightening.
So now that you’ve read up on the issues that effect youth, what do you think–popular vote or electoral vote–which should decide the winning outcome for elections? Some claim that the popular vote can be bought.
And is that a rock in Central Park you’re sitting on?
The biggest thing I think Americans, and this is especially true of those under 25 or 30, are missing when it comes to understanding why voting matters is this: a fundamental understanding of how democracy works. Americans are not taught about democracy, they are taught, by both schools and mainstream media, to believe in political fairy tales. So they see politicians as either “perfect” or “all the same.” They look for saviors, because we’re a faith-based society. They even say stuff like “But, since the 2 major parties rarely satisfy most voters…” Democracy, of course, is about creating working coalitions to try to move in the general direction you want to go. Politicians are the flawed instruments of that. Thomas Jefferson couldn’t have been elected President in 1800 if he hadn’t teamed with a corrupt New Yorker named Aaron Burr who he never liked. Nor could he have gotten past the House of Representatives in 1801 without promising opposition leaders a deal. Abraham Lincoln needed to name his former key nomination appointments to his cabinet. Theodore Roosevelt reached power by teaming with William McKinley who he had virtually nothing in common with. John Kennedy needed Lyndon Johnson with him to get elected. Our parties, almost all “democratic” parties around the world, are nothing more than grand coalitions that express general directions for society. In the US if you vaguely believe that government should be big in economic impact, generally favor those who work for a living over those with inherited wealth, and should be small in limiting personal freedoms, you’re a Democrat. If you believe the reverse, you’re a Republican. Though the Republicans are the third party on their side of these questions, the choice has not really changed since 1794 when the questions were the price of western lands, government pouring money to bankers, and things like the Sedition Acts.
As long as people misunderstand this, and seek God-like cure-alls, they will either choose demigogues (Bush) or not vote.
Now, if I was 18-21 and had any kind of brain, knowing that Bush (a) believes in continuous war, (b) opposes Pell Grants and Federal Student Loans, (c) Favors taxing those who work more than those who get their money for free, (d) favors vicious penalties for non-dangerous drug use, (e) opposes even research that conflicts with his religion, I would have moved heaven and earth to vote against him. If I knew that politics controls questions like whether I can drink or be stopped and ticketed as an MIP, whether I’ll be drafted, whether car rental companies and banks can discriminate against me because of my age, I’d vote in every election every time and bring all my friends.
Why don’t all in that age group? I have no idea.
The missing link, and it’s so completely missing that you’re not even addressing it, is that of power.
Power.
People don’t understand power. We get this notion in school that everyone votes for a leader and the leader leads, and so forth. What we don’t get from education is that we can empower ourselves to be involved in society to a degree of our own choosing… That we, the people, have the power.
Educational systems are rigged to drain students of their power, which is reasonable. But people seldom get an experience of power beyond their personal lives, even if that. Voting is a far-reaching power, and what happens in the voting booths of the nation determines the balance of political power in profound ways.
Knowing things about the world is good, but understanding that you are powerful, and that if you don’t vote you’re throwing that power away… That’s the real motivator. And going back to what thenarrator said, you make alliances and congregate power and this has to be seen for what it is. The real equation of the last election was not policy A versus policy B, it was who had power.
To respond to your comment: What book or event got me interested in what I’m interested in… I grew up as a middle-peasant, a farmer. I worked a lot of very proletarian jobs, masonry, industrial dishwashing, etc. When I was in highschool I was a drug-dealer and a theif. That is how I first came to understand economics. I gave it up because of the inhumanity of it. People tried to kill me. Everyone, even my “friends”, were always working against each other. Trust is impossible in that world. Then I was arrested on a minor larceny charge. After I got out of that life a lot of my partners went to prison on felonies. One guy even went away for murder. All of that was really influential in making me who I am. If I had to blame books, I would blame Nietzsche’s books which I read first when I was forteen, and Marx whom I started reading when I was seventeen. Of course it was a long time before I understood any of it, but I had a fairly instinctive knowledge of it because of my experiences and my class position.
Social problems aren’t going to just go away because education reform, or welfare, or keynesian policy. The “invisible hand of capital” doesn’t make things any better. I learned that early on. As long as the CIA is running drugs, functioning as the chief capital accumulators between paramilitaries in Columbia to BLOODS (which, before Hoover and COINTELPRO pumped all of those drugs into the ghettos to neutralize black radicalism, stood for Brotherly Love Overcomes Oppression Daily) in cities large and small accross the US. in order to get secret money (which they aren’t accountable for) to pay for secret wars (which they would certainly rather not be accountable for), this situation isn’t going to be improved by all of the free methadone clinics and socialized healthcare in the world. Changing the superstructure isn’t going to change our basic relations, which, person to person, are commodified. These basic relations (relations of production) form a central part of the complex structured whole which, by its very operational logic, needs society to follow a certain stratified order, here and globally. There is no American Dream. It is this that must be changed. You can’t built a beautiful house on a rotten foundation. It will still collapse.
I agree with you that education reform is very important. But if we want people to be civically engaged, then they don’t need to have any friendly liberal illusions about the way the world works. As long as people are just parroting slogans (be they Bush’s or Michael Moore’s) then they aren’t going understand anything. Research is important, but most people don’t have time for it, and that’s the way its supposed to be.
What am I doing for a career? I don’t like that word. But all the same, I’m working on my Nepali. In less than a year, I’ll be there as an independent journalist. After that… well, the future is wide open.
Hope that sufficiently answers your question.