Politicophobia

On wednesday night, Deepa Kumar started her speech with this video. Even though this video might seem absurd, the reality is that most of us still inhibit the so called "islamophobia." Therefore, during her speech, Kumar tried to educate audience that the image of Islam is not evil and is not natural. How the image of "muslim enemy" was constructed has an extensive history and, as Kumar points, is solely created in order to justify agenda of the empire by the "political elite."

While half of her book focuses on the history, the other half reflects the political agenda. While I can agree with majority of the points in her book, I was interested in hearing what Kumar had to say about current situation and the outrage about "the innocence of Muslims"(especially after I had watched the movie). In her words, this movie is only "the tip of the iceberg." That people throughout the Middle East simply were exhausted from occupations, regimes, constant promises, in addition of seeing their countries being destroyed and relatives killed. So no surprise that any, (even though satyrical and stupid) remarks diminishing their religion only magnified already inferior situation.

Kumar asked the audience what could we do about it. Firstly, she remarked that we must deconstruct those images of Muslims as "enemies" and have empathy for "the other." Also, another consideration was that we must encompass solidarity instead of sympathy. While her suggestions were fair-minded, couple of people in the audience still expressed their concern about nuclear weapons and Muslims burning American flags...to which, I thought, she responded with educated answers.

However, even thought I don't consider myself racist (at least try not to be one), her answers don't justify all the reasons either. I understand how people can get tired of oppression or living with fear and prejudice. We were oppressed by the Soviet Union: rewritten history, exile, injustice, restrictions, etc. however, the so called "uprise" and gaining independence didn't happen with civilians destroying their own towns, killing others, etc. Prayers and national songs were only weapons...

In my opinion, even with the current situation, if Middle East would've shown a different, calm, peaceful side (instead of "rage" and killing other people), the "upset" ones would've been the "political elite," since there would less reasons for them to intrude and further escalate the image of "Muslim enemy."

Intellectual power...

In regards to the prompt, honestly, it is hard to come up with the list of people I would consider "public intellectuals." The term itself is still debatable and each of us would probably create a different list. I guess, my doubts rise from what I would consider a "public intellectual" from the past versus modern day. 

In the past, I suspect that public intellectuals were concerned with more philosophical questions, such as existence of humanity (and maybe looked more like Rodin's "Thinker" too). In the present day, such postulations are taking a different approach, especially with an affect of mass media. Therefore, it is even harder to distinguish "public intellectuals" from "opinion makers" or media "manipulators." If journalists, politicians, academics, novelists, etc. are added to the list of intellectuals, then Wolf Blitz, Christiane Amanpour, even Jon Stewart could be added as well. The fact that I would recognize and listen to those names more than any of the top 100 on the li, I guess, proves that we live in the culture affected by the mass media. 

On that note, even though I can assimilate to Posner's statement in regards to declining quality, however, I don't think this makes "public intellectuals" endangered species. I would assume that with media's and internet's help, (Posner's provided lists even show that by "media mentions" or "web hits") the "popularity" those public intellectuals probably has grown larger. Moreover, existing criticism through blogging attracts larger audiences and ignites more discussions, engaging "public citizens." As Daniel Drezner states in his article:

The most useful function of bloggers is when they engage in the quality control of other public intellectuals. [Richard] Posner believed public intellectuals were in decline because there was no market discipline for poor quality. Even if public intellectuals royally screw up, he argued, the mass public is sufficiently disinterested and disengaged for it not to matter. Bloggers are changing this dynamic, however. If Michael Ignatieff, Paul Krugman or William Kristol pen substandard essays, blogs have and will provide a wide spectrum of critical feedback.

Overall, the term "public intellectual" itself has a short history. Whether they are on decline or not, the impact of internet increased awareness about them and gave opportunities to "under-recognized" journalists, activists, novelists, etc. to join the list. Therefore, whom people choose to listen to or consider them "as intellectuals" may vary greatly. If it wouldn't, then the debates about it wouldn't exist. 

Image: "Rodin's "Thinker" Source: prospectmagazine.co.uk 

Shadowing "Glass Ceiling"?

Photo from amazon.com

Interestingly enough, yesterday the NBC's Today Show featured Hanna Rosin, an author of "The End of Men: And the Rise of Women."

Rosin discussed that women are shadowing "glass ceiling," since more of them focus on education, successful careers, etc. Even though barriers still exist, author claims that social dynamics have shifted and women are adapting to the changes in the public sphere. StarTribune claims:

"The End of Men" is undoubtedly an attention-grabbing title, but as Rosin writes, "[the] 'end' might not be a permanent state of existence." Readers would do best to see Rosin's book in this light. It's not the final word on gender roles in the 21st century, but it's a notable starting point for a fascinating conversation."

Do you agree that women are surpassing men? 

Welcome everyone...

Just wanted to start this blog with a welcome note as a mark for the beginning. From the introductory class, it looks like the "Public Discourse" will be interesting and engaging (especially, since it is taught by Steve Macek :). With a variety of topics and current events around the world, I'm sure the discussions will be enlightening.

As discussed in the class, the internet truly changed the public sphere and recent events in the middle east with the attacks on foreign embassies show us what outrage might be caused by a film. Have any of you seen this anti-Islam film?
http://news.yahoo.com/protests-against-film-spread-mideast-1-killed-135739393.html