On our last tutor lecture, we discussed about how politics turn to violence. And before ending the class, our professor asked us “How can we end violence?” I personally, had a difficult time answering this because I don’t think violence can ever be removed from our system. There were some of my classmates who have given good answers. But if our professor have picked me to answer this, my answer would be that I think the only way we can stop people from acts of violence is if people will learn how to value lives of other people instead of valuing material things. This is my answer because I think people or human beings are driven to gain power and wealth all the time. We have this desire because of means of survival. But if we give more importance to life and values, I think people would be less violent. But I don’t think it would be the complete answer or general answer for everyone.
I don’t know but as I’ve said, I really think that it is in our human nature to act aggressively against each other for different reasons. And sometimes an act of violence can also be an act to keep everyone and everything in order. In the beginning of the chapter in the book, Anne Orford emphasized force to be answer to helping other people in achieving peace and order for everyone. The force being described is the military interventions implemented by a particular organization or country. In my opinion, I think military force has been a convincing act to relieve others from suffering because it is an influential force. If you would think about it, the army or military force is a powerful factor in gaining power but it can also be used to prevent others from doing harm. For example, when Marcos implemented Martial Law during his time, the country was very peaceful. Yes, there are news about people being kidnapped or killed by his men but generally, the country was peaceful and everybody was following orders. I think because of the powerful force the military has, people are more disciplined. They give more importance to their fears, so that they don’t do anything reckless or harmful against other people. But others would say that this kind of movement would be not so essential anymore in this day of age. Due to globalization, there would be a more integrated and harmonized legal system that could be practiced for security and human rights (Orford, 2009).
As also discussed in the book, we would have to look at different perspectives in how to solve the issue of violence worldwide. Law and politics are both systems that have powerful influences over our way of living. And using these systems may help in stopping people from harming others. The first matter that is discussed is the Metaphysical account of Law; the relation between legality and legitimacy. The example given in the book was about the Kosovo intervention, the act was illegal because it did not comply with the authorized grounds but it was legitimate in a sense that it was an essential act fought for values. The reference to the universal law gives legitimacy to the act of intervention (Orford, 2009). The second account of law is the Realist; an intervention that is not concerned with universal norms. This dismisses any portrayal of the systematic nature of international order or any suggestion that international law may bring into being a political community (Orford, 2009). There is also the Decisionist account of law which claims that the primary role of the state is to protect citizens, and that the state depends for its survival upon the existence of a sovereign who can guarantee the values and law of the state (Orford, 2009). I think this account of law is somewhat related to the fact that violence is most of the time ordered by rulers. So I think this kind of account of law makes sense because leaders or rulers most of the time are the important factor in implementing rules and laws that could unite people or harm people. Lastly would be the Democratic account of law. This is about the determination of legitimacy that requires a justification from principles that are immanent to the law itself (Orford, 2009). Discussing these different accounts could help us understand better how we can come up with sufficient laws that could be essential in stopping people from harming others.
There would be an effective way and also proper way in solving the issues about harm against other people. The effective way would be the use of force because as I’ve described military force is a powerful mean of implementing laws. And the proper way would be implementing laws that would stop people from harming others by means of legal actions. But if you think about it, these two perspectives can’t be intertwined because it is somewhat difficult to come up with means that can be effective at the same time proper for everyone.
Reference:
McNeil, W., Global Politics, 2008
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Why does politics turn to violence?
Politics has been a controversial issue because most of the time it involves unconventional and inhuman practices. The most common act of violence that involves the majority of people is war. It has been an issue all throughout human existence because many people have died for and because of war. But why does politics turn to violence? What are factors that lead people to evil means in attaining power? Why does it seem that it is just the only way to solve certain issues about politics?
Just a few months ago, one of the most unbelievable acts of violence due to politics has happened here in our country, the Maguindanao Massacre. Many people have been killed; most of them are women and journalists. The accused leaders of this massacre are the Ampatuan Clan. When I found out about this heart breaking incident, I felt so much grief and at the same time confusion. It got me thinking of how someone can be so heartless and evil to do such a heinous crime. And to think the people killed were innocent people who were just doing their jobs and fighting for what they think are right. Of course everything happens for a reason but I don’t think there would be reasons enough to justify such action.
In a larger context, mass killing has been a cultural phenomenon due to different factors (Bourke). In the book, it has been described that war or mass killing happens greatly in many places, any time because it is intentional. Killing can happen anywhere, anytime because everyone it is inflicted to most people. It was also said that because of history textbooks, the real cause or intention of war is being redefined to make it a justifiable action.
As I’ve said everything happens for a reason, everyone has their own opinion and intentions of acting. Bourke in the book gave three main reasons or excuses why people kill or hurt other people. First, there is retribution, during war soldiers would kill their enemies or shoot them. They do this instead of taking their enemies as prisoners because they feel obliged to kill those that have killed their own men. The second would be due to obedience, the main excuse soldiers or army men would say that they are just obeying what they were asked to do. They feel that they are obliged to do so by their leaders to also lessen the guilt. And the final excuse would be parallel response; this means that soldiers or men would be more willing to kill someone before they are killed themselves. I think this is a natural initiative for men to inflict pain to others. As described we strive to survive and even if we have to use or take advantage of other people, we will do it just so that we can survive and live. I think people, especially those that have been tasked to inflict violence, should provide themselves with sufficient reasons for doing their actions to keep them sane and to feed their conscience.
But when you think of it, of course not anyone would do such violent actions unless they are told to by someone who has the power. The people who would declare war most of the time are politicians, the leader of the country or certain state. Bourke described that war only takes place if the leaders feel that they would benefit from such or a threat is arising and so they have to protect their country or state from it. Economically speaking, sometimes war can benefit the country. It has been discussed in class that war can enrich the economical status of the country involved. There are also declarations of war due to territories. I think this has been one of the oldest reasons for war to happen. During ancient times, it has been an essential matter to declare war against other territories to gain that territory. And of course, sometimes there would be just some evil leaders who would lead his people to war due to evil reasons or evil thinking. Lately, competing political ideologies has been one of the most popular reasons why people fight against each other. Due to differences in ideas people would go against each other just to protect or defend their own beliefs. I think this is due to the reason that people are just really stubborn and we always have this intention to prove that we are better than others and such.
As I read all these facts about reasons people give to justify their actions, I can’t help but think that violence and aggression really runs in the nature of human beings. I guess for survival and also because of the reason that we have been deceived by the true intentions of war. I think violence is sometimes the answer to political issues because people can’t just think of other ways to solve it. Maybe because throughout history it has been an idea that gives good outcomes, except of course the fact that many people suffer and die. I don’t know and I will never understand the reason why violence still occurs but I do hope that this kind of acts will lessen. People have become more modern and rational and barbaric means should be eliminated in my opinion.
Just a few months ago, one of the most unbelievable acts of violence due to politics has happened here in our country, the Maguindanao Massacre. Many people have been killed; most of them are women and journalists. The accused leaders of this massacre are the Ampatuan Clan. When I found out about this heart breaking incident, I felt so much grief and at the same time confusion. It got me thinking of how someone can be so heartless and evil to do such a heinous crime. And to think the people killed were innocent people who were just doing their jobs and fighting for what they think are right. Of course everything happens for a reason but I don’t think there would be reasons enough to justify such action.
In a larger context, mass killing has been a cultural phenomenon due to different factors (Bourke). In the book, it has been described that war or mass killing happens greatly in many places, any time because it is intentional. Killing can happen anywhere, anytime because everyone it is inflicted to most people. It was also said that because of history textbooks, the real cause or intention of war is being redefined to make it a justifiable action.
As I’ve said everything happens for a reason, everyone has their own opinion and intentions of acting. Bourke in the book gave three main reasons or excuses why people kill or hurt other people. First, there is retribution, during war soldiers would kill their enemies or shoot them. They do this instead of taking their enemies as prisoners because they feel obliged to kill those that have killed their own men. The second would be due to obedience, the main excuse soldiers or army men would say that they are just obeying what they were asked to do. They feel that they are obliged to do so by their leaders to also lessen the guilt. And the final excuse would be parallel response; this means that soldiers or men would be more willing to kill someone before they are killed themselves. I think this is a natural initiative for men to inflict pain to others. As described we strive to survive and even if we have to use or take advantage of other people, we will do it just so that we can survive and live. I think people, especially those that have been tasked to inflict violence, should provide themselves with sufficient reasons for doing their actions to keep them sane and to feed their conscience.
But when you think of it, of course not anyone would do such violent actions unless they are told to by someone who has the power. The people who would declare war most of the time are politicians, the leader of the country or certain state. Bourke described that war only takes place if the leaders feel that they would benefit from such or a threat is arising and so they have to protect their country or state from it. Economically speaking, sometimes war can benefit the country. It has been discussed in class that war can enrich the economical status of the country involved. There are also declarations of war due to territories. I think this has been one of the oldest reasons for war to happen. During ancient times, it has been an essential matter to declare war against other territories to gain that territory. And of course, sometimes there would be just some evil leaders who would lead his people to war due to evil reasons or evil thinking. Lately, competing political ideologies has been one of the most popular reasons why people fight against each other. Due to differences in ideas people would go against each other just to protect or defend their own beliefs. I think this is due to the reason that people are just really stubborn and we always have this intention to prove that we are better than others and such.
As I read all these facts about reasons people give to justify their actions, I can’t help but think that violence and aggression really runs in the nature of human beings. I guess for survival and also because of the reason that we have been deceived by the true intentions of war. I think violence is sometimes the answer to political issues because people can’t just think of other ways to solve it. Maybe because throughout history it has been an idea that gives good outcomes, except of course the fact that many people suffer and die. I don’t know and I will never understand the reason why violence still occurs but I do hope that this kind of acts will lessen. People have become more modern and rational and barbaric means should be eliminated in my opinion.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
How can we end poverty?
Wherever you are, whatever time it may be, you can see, hear, and feel poverty. It is one of aspect of our society that we’ve tried to eliminate but unfortunately, many have failed in doing so. It has been the talk of many because of its many implications in our lives. For others, it is a sign of injustice, a face of difference and a symbol of economic instability. When we say poverty, we immediately think of people who lacks in material things or the ability to live with all the necessities like food or shelter. But as I’ve read the book, I’ve realized that it has different meaning based on different factors that have caused it. There are the natural explanations, the cultural factor and also economical aspect. And by understanding these different aspects, many have taken into consideration these differences and made this as a stepping stone for creating a program that could eliminate poverty.
Due to globalization, ending poverty became an important issue because many have become aware of this phenomenon. Many have become more open to this different world from those that are living comfortably. It has also become evident that even countries that are considered rich have some part that is facing poverty. It also an important matter because in some way, the world is also divided with the implications of poverty. And I think because of the world becoming globalized, it is important to help and make all countries become developed and rich. It is visible nowadays, that powerful people are trying to lessen poverty in their own ways. They try to give money, build homes for the poor people and they even try to make use of their popularity to voice out their advocacy to the people. But even with so many attempts to diminish poverty, poverty hasn’t disappeared completely.
Of course, because of the notion that poverty is due to lack of materials and wealth, it is only practical to think of an economic solution which is economic growth. For example, here in the Philippines, because of the upcoming election many politicians main goal is to erase poverty. And their way of doing this is to commit the government to proper education, make more infrastructures and develop emergency relief. Because these three things are important aspects of the economy that can help people especially those that are poor to become attain a better life. But this is hard to achieve completely in the case of the Philippines because of the powerful people who make use of the poor for their own welfare. As said in the book, “the poor provide the laboring capacity that enables the rich to live forms of life more attentive to the compulsions of cultural globalization.” Meaning, the rich or those in power make use of the poor especially in businesses because the poor are more capable of doing hard labor.
But of course, we should also look at a different perspective. Like for example, some may say that poor people are poor because they lack the ability or the desire to do something to alleviate them from poverty. But if the environment or the economy doesn’t provide the market for the people to engage and use their skills, even if they have the capacity and want, they will still not be able to do something to improve their lives.
Even with so many resources and will to eliminate poverty, it is still an issue that’s still left unsolved. Personally, I think the main problem is that even if some are trying to come up with solutions to eradicate this issue, many are still more concern of their own power and wealth that they just try to resolve the problem in a short time but not entirely. I think it is important to remind those people especially those in power to get their values straight and try to think of others instead of their own interest. Maybe then, poverty will be completely eliminated all over the world.
Due to globalization, ending poverty became an important issue because many have become aware of this phenomenon. Many have become more open to this different world from those that are living comfortably. It has also become evident that even countries that are considered rich have some part that is facing poverty. It also an important matter because in some way, the world is also divided with the implications of poverty. And I think because of the world becoming globalized, it is important to help and make all countries become developed and rich. It is visible nowadays, that powerful people are trying to lessen poverty in their own ways. They try to give money, build homes for the poor people and they even try to make use of their popularity to voice out their advocacy to the people. But even with so many attempts to diminish poverty, poverty hasn’t disappeared completely.
Of course, because of the notion that poverty is due to lack of materials and wealth, it is only practical to think of an economic solution which is economic growth. For example, here in the Philippines, because of the upcoming election many politicians main goal is to erase poverty. And their way of doing this is to commit the government to proper education, make more infrastructures and develop emergency relief. Because these three things are important aspects of the economy that can help people especially those that are poor to become attain a better life. But this is hard to achieve completely in the case of the Philippines because of the powerful people who make use of the poor for their own welfare. As said in the book, “the poor provide the laboring capacity that enables the rich to live forms of life more attentive to the compulsions of cultural globalization.” Meaning, the rich or those in power make use of the poor especially in businesses because the poor are more capable of doing hard labor.
But of course, we should also look at a different perspective. Like for example, some may say that poor people are poor because they lack the ability or the desire to do something to alleviate them from poverty. But if the environment or the economy doesn’t provide the market for the people to engage and use their skills, even if they have the capacity and want, they will still not be able to do something to improve their lives.
Even with so many resources and will to eliminate poverty, it is still an issue that’s still left unsolved. Personally, I think the main problem is that even if some are trying to come up with solutions to eradicate this issue, many are still more concern of their own power and wealth that they just try to resolve the problem in a short time but not entirely. I think it is important to remind those people especially those in power to get their values straight and try to think of others instead of their own interest. Maybe then, poverty will be completely eliminated all over the world.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
How is the world organized economically?
Before this chapter, it was discussed how is the world divided territorially. In this area it was important to understand by territory, it means that the world is divided due to ownership or control over a geographical area and such. But now, we are going to discuss about the world being divided or organized economically. I think this time the term used is organized because in a sense, all of the countries are connected and intertwined economically. Some countries may be richer and progressive than others but only due to the fact that they know how to get better resources and they are more economically powerful than some.
Every country has their own economy. When you say economy, it is described as a field wherein the scarce resources of a particular country is being produced and distributed. This is an essential aspect for a country because this is what determines a first world country to a third world country. And clearly, it has been a part of our human nature to make use of our resources for our benefits. We started out in agriculture terms, then we progressed to industrialization and now we are in a more modern times called technology. From natural resources to human resources, literally everything in this world can be used for economic gain and power. Due to the increasing hunger for economic gain, it was discussed in the book that economics is not always about legality and formality. But as said the other half of it, the invisible and often illegal aspect of it pose challenges. I guess there are some people who make use of their wealth in a different way. This kind of act is not actually invisible to us, we are aware of such actions but we just never get the proof that we need to make sure that such deals does exist. But as I've said, many people are really hungry for power and wealth and some may even do not so legal things to get that kind of power and wealth.
Now looking at the more general aspect of economy in globalization, we can say that people then up to now are trying to intensify the effect of economic progress all over the globe. I think Western culture is best known for this because I think their way of thinking economically has been the most visible globally. And some may even say that their economy can have a great effect on some countries like the Philippines. Also, advanced industrialized countries make use not only of their own resources for economic gain but other countries that has rich resources for their own gain.
It is pretty evident in the current situation of countries all over the globe, that each and every one of us has an effect on each others economy because it is not enough to make use of our own resources. We trade in what we have, we get what we don't have from other countries and I think this is how economics flow. It is important to keep in mind that a country should also be able to stand up on its own but because of globalization, it can't be ignored that countries try to make use of each others strengths and weaknesses for economic gain and even power. That's how globalization works even in economical terms.
Every country has their own economy. When you say economy, it is described as a field wherein the scarce resources of a particular country is being produced and distributed. This is an essential aspect for a country because this is what determines a first world country to a third world country. And clearly, it has been a part of our human nature to make use of our resources for our benefits. We started out in agriculture terms, then we progressed to industrialization and now we are in a more modern times called technology. From natural resources to human resources, literally everything in this world can be used for economic gain and power. Due to the increasing hunger for economic gain, it was discussed in the book that economics is not always about legality and formality. But as said the other half of it, the invisible and often illegal aspect of it pose challenges. I guess there are some people who make use of their wealth in a different way. This kind of act is not actually invisible to us, we are aware of such actions but we just never get the proof that we need to make sure that such deals does exist. But as I've said, many people are really hungry for power and wealth and some may even do not so legal things to get that kind of power and wealth.
Now looking at the more general aspect of economy in globalization, we can say that people then up to now are trying to intensify the effect of economic progress all over the globe. I think Western culture is best known for this because I think their way of thinking economically has been the most visible globally. And some may even say that their economy can have a great effect on some countries like the Philippines. Also, advanced industrialized countries make use not only of their own resources for economic gain but other countries that has rich resources for their own gain.
It is pretty evident in the current situation of countries all over the globe, that each and every one of us has an effect on each others economy because it is not enough to make use of our own resources. We trade in what we have, we get what we don't have from other countries and I think this is how economics flow. It is important to keep in mind that a country should also be able to stand up on its own but because of globalization, it can't be ignored that countries try to make use of each others strengths and weaknesses for economic gain and even power. That's how globalization works even in economical terms.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Why is the world divided territorially?
Globalization is a great step in making different countries connects with each other through different means. But in the first place, why are the countries separated geographically and also politically. In geographical terms, the world is separated by different bodies of water. From what I remember in my highschool days, the melting of ice caps caused other land forms to be submerged by water. That’s why some countries are only islands, while some are big and connected, etc. In terms of political aspect, the world is divided due to different laws and government. But the more prominent division of this world that affects people’s way of living is in terms of the political aspect or territorially.
Territory means that a certain area is under the control or jurisdiction of a group of people (Elden, 2008). In simple terms, this means that an area may it be water or land is held responsible by a certain group of people or the state. I think the world became divided territorially because different group of people have made different civilizations in certain lands. Our ancestors started their way of life by being Nomadic, meaning they’re hunters who go to different places to seek for food. But once they had difficulty in gathering food by means of hunting, they’ve settled in areas that they think they can prosper and gather food better and that’s when they became farmers. Agriculture has helped our ancestors create different ancient civilizations that evolved into our current modern civilizations. Once our ancestors have settled in and created their civilizations in a particular area, they’ve become more populated and some have travelled by the seas in search of more lands to conquer. From what I remember again in my high school lessons, two dominant nations; Spain and Portugal divided the world in terms of territory. I think this is one example of the beginning of different nations trying to conquer more territories. Because I think people then believe that the more land or area a certain nation or state conquers is proportioned to their power.
But if you will look closely at these nations, being divided territorially also means being divided within. America is divided into different states, the Philippines is also divided into three main regions and so are many other nations/countries. I think this kind of division is a political plan because a big nation like America has different people within it. And again different people have different ways of thinking and governing their people. This is a more convenient way because laws are better understood within the state and the country is more organized politically speaking. But sometimes, this division can also be a cause of chaos and misunderstanding among people within that nation.
But nowadays, I think the division of the world is no longer a problem but only geographically speaking. As I’ve said, globalization has led us to making the world more connected and intertwined. But politically speaking, people in the world are still divided. I think territories may play a part in this division but I think people are more involved in still making this world divided. There are some of us who doesn’t want to connect with other nations because of certain differences.
References:
Elden, S. Chapter 9:Why is the world divided territorially?, Global Politics, 2008
McNeil, W. World History
Territory means that a certain area is under the control or jurisdiction of a group of people (Elden, 2008). In simple terms, this means that an area may it be water or land is held responsible by a certain group of people or the state. I think the world became divided territorially because different group of people have made different civilizations in certain lands. Our ancestors started their way of life by being Nomadic, meaning they’re hunters who go to different places to seek for food. But once they had difficulty in gathering food by means of hunting, they’ve settled in areas that they think they can prosper and gather food better and that’s when they became farmers. Agriculture has helped our ancestors create different ancient civilizations that evolved into our current modern civilizations. Once our ancestors have settled in and created their civilizations in a particular area, they’ve become more populated and some have travelled by the seas in search of more lands to conquer. From what I remember again in my high school lessons, two dominant nations; Spain and Portugal divided the world in terms of territory. I think this is one example of the beginning of different nations trying to conquer more territories. Because I think people then believe that the more land or area a certain nation or state conquers is proportioned to their power.
But if you will look closely at these nations, being divided territorially also means being divided within. America is divided into different states, the Philippines is also divided into three main regions and so are many other nations/countries. I think this kind of division is a political plan because a big nation like America has different people within it. And again different people have different ways of thinking and governing their people. This is a more convenient way because laws are better understood within the state and the country is more organized politically speaking. But sometimes, this division can also be a cause of chaos and misunderstanding among people within that nation.
But nowadays, I think the division of the world is no longer a problem but only geographically speaking. As I’ve said, globalization has led us to making the world more connected and intertwined. But politically speaking, people in the world are still divided. I think territories may play a part in this division but I think people are more involved in still making this world divided. There are some of us who doesn’t want to connect with other nations because of certain differences.
References:
Elden, S. Chapter 9:Why is the world divided territorially?, Global Politics, 2008
McNeil, W. World History
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
How do we find out what's going on in the world?
Whenever I open the Yahoo website, I can immediately notice the part of the website that’s about different news not only in the Philippines but all over the world. This part helps me find out the different situation or important events that are happening all over the world. Internet is one process of how information is delivered to the people in different countries or different times. And I think being able to deliver the information all over the world is one important fact about Globalization.
But how do we really find out what’s going on in the world? The definite answer to this question is media. Media has different forms and shapes but its main core is about gathering information and spreading the information to the people. Different information are gathered, constructed and sent through different forms of technology (Lisle, 2008). That’s why technology is also important for globalization because through technology, people are able to communicate and gain knowledge from other countries.
As pointed out, Media plays an important role for global politics. It is not only essential to study the direct objects or facts concerning globalization but also the process of which these objects and events undergo. Media helps people find out about certain situations and events concerning humanity but this doesn’t mean that people have the same opinion or outlook in interpreting the information sent by media. As I’ve said in my first blog, human beings can think for themselves and for others. So because we can think, we can evaluate and rationalize the information we gathered from media. But because we are also different, we also differ in how we interpret that information. According to Hall, there are three types of audiences; there are people who watch and read media without criticizing the message sent by the media, there are also people who watch and read media but only to a certain degree of criticizing the message, meaning they first accept the idea but not the entire story. There would be some part that he would disagree about. And lastly, there are people who are completely critical about the entire meaning of the story. The different classes of audiences signify that people are not incompetent when it comes to understanding media. This only means that people really give importance to media and the message it holds because the audience knows and feel that they have a say on whatever is happening to the world. This is another way of how globalization works.
I think Media plays a big part not only in my own community but also in every nation. I think because of media, people became more aware of their surroundings and these have helped them seek for more answers to their lives. Media has also played a big part when it comes to political issues; due to the message sent by the media to the community people become more engaged to the community. For example, here in the Philippines, the youth are influenced by what they see in TV’s, read in magazines and hear in the radios nowadays. That’s why presidential candidates use media for their own benefit to reach the community and gain votes. The media’s influence is also visible when it comes to more serious situations in politics. Media serves as the voice, sight and heart of the people. That’s why it is important that the media serves as a way for people to know what’s happening around them. But as said in the book by Debbie Lisle, the media is always biased. Biased in a way that we must always remember that the message media is trying to send to the people have been altered to different sides or opinions of those that have written or produced it. It is not possible to have a fact or event unbiased because people themselves are biased and different. We have different opinions and ideas and these influences the way we perceive and deliver media.
Media really plays many roles in our lives. It can be for entertainment, knowledge and also global politics. It is also very abundant and helpful for the lives of many. Through media, we gather information and we are able to analyze this information and make use of this information. But for us to also keep growing not only as a person but as a nation, we should always keep challenging ourselves and always ask questions. This way we will continue on finding out information outside our domain and at the same time progress.
But how do we really find out what’s going on in the world? The definite answer to this question is media. Media has different forms and shapes but its main core is about gathering information and spreading the information to the people. Different information are gathered, constructed and sent through different forms of technology (Lisle, 2008). That’s why technology is also important for globalization because through technology, people are able to communicate and gain knowledge from other countries.
As pointed out, Media plays an important role for global politics. It is not only essential to study the direct objects or facts concerning globalization but also the process of which these objects and events undergo. Media helps people find out about certain situations and events concerning humanity but this doesn’t mean that people have the same opinion or outlook in interpreting the information sent by media. As I’ve said in my first blog, human beings can think for themselves and for others. So because we can think, we can evaluate and rationalize the information we gathered from media. But because we are also different, we also differ in how we interpret that information. According to Hall, there are three types of audiences; there are people who watch and read media without criticizing the message sent by the media, there are also people who watch and read media but only to a certain degree of criticizing the message, meaning they first accept the idea but not the entire story. There would be some part that he would disagree about. And lastly, there are people who are completely critical about the entire meaning of the story. The different classes of audiences signify that people are not incompetent when it comes to understanding media. This only means that people really give importance to media and the message it holds because the audience knows and feel that they have a say on whatever is happening to the world. This is another way of how globalization works.
I think Media plays a big part not only in my own community but also in every nation. I think because of media, people became more aware of their surroundings and these have helped them seek for more answers to their lives. Media has also played a big part when it comes to political issues; due to the message sent by the media to the community people become more engaged to the community. For example, here in the Philippines, the youth are influenced by what they see in TV’s, read in magazines and hear in the radios nowadays. That’s why presidential candidates use media for their own benefit to reach the community and gain votes. The media’s influence is also visible when it comes to more serious situations in politics. Media serves as the voice, sight and heart of the people. That’s why it is important that the media serves as a way for people to know what’s happening around them. But as said in the book by Debbie Lisle, the media is always biased. Biased in a way that we must always remember that the message media is trying to send to the people have been altered to different sides or opinions of those that have written or produced it. It is not possible to have a fact or event unbiased because people themselves are biased and different. We have different opinions and ideas and these influences the way we perceive and deliver media.
Media really plays many roles in our lives. It can be for entertainment, knowledge and also global politics. It is also very abundant and helpful for the lives of many. Through media, we gather information and we are able to analyze this information and make use of this information. But for us to also keep growing not only as a person but as a nation, we should always keep challenging ourselves and always ask questions. This way we will continue on finding out information outside our domain and at the same time progress.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
How do Religious Beliefs affect Politics?
"How do Religious beliefs affect Politics?” this question will immediately make you think of many words, but I think the first two words that will come to my mind are influential and controversial. I think politics and religion have been a part of the world since the start of human kind and it is very essential to understand its effects on the people but also to the entire world, especially about globalization. When I say that religion and politics are influential, it is because religion can affect the way of living by a person, so is politics. They are also both controversial because many events that have happened all around the world that are somewhat bloody and a little unconventional.
Let us first differentiate religion from politics. When we say religion, we immediately think of a higher power, specifically God. We also talk about beliefs, divinity and meaning of life. While politics on the other hand is about being governed by fellow human being, it also talks about laws specifically in a nation, municipality or anywhere there’s government, there’s politics. Religion is about divinity, beyond human while politics is about government controlled by humans. So if you think closely, how can these two different perspectives of a person influence each other? Religious beliefs can affect politics in how the people with that specific religion use their religious beliefs as guidance in achieving their political goals.
From the book Global Politics, it was said that when you think of religion and global politics, you will immediately think of Islamic world. I think the author made this example because Islamic world or Islam to be exact is a very strict religion. From what I know, they value their religious beliefs very much that is connected to any decisions they will make especially when it comes to political goals. They have Islamism for them to continue living with both their religious beliefs and politics. This is their way to become modern without having to lose their values and beliefs. But along with these, they have been already convicted as people who are violent and their religion may seem to be the core of this violence. Because when you say Islam or Muslim, people may immediately think that that person is a terrorist. Their religion is already being tainted with their unconventional way of pursuing political achievements.
But of course, not all religions are aimed for violence in taking in global politics. Some religion uses their beliefs in building new bases of mass popular support. A religious institution is also capable of forming alliances of the sort traditionally seen in global politics (Mandaville, 2008). But some believes that the church should be separated from the state. Some say that this is so because of the differences between cultures. Different religions have different beliefs, and this makes the connection between other people or countries hard or impossible because of cultural and religious differences. And this could result into more complications and hindrance for globalization.
I think even if we separate or put religion and politics together, it will always have the same effect. I think religious beliefs will always serve as guidance for global politics or it can also be hindrance for political goals. Either way religion will somewhat control politics because maybe religion is more powerful than politics will ever be.
Let us first differentiate religion from politics. When we say religion, we immediately think of a higher power, specifically God. We also talk about beliefs, divinity and meaning of life. While politics on the other hand is about being governed by fellow human being, it also talks about laws specifically in a nation, municipality or anywhere there’s government, there’s politics. Religion is about divinity, beyond human while politics is about government controlled by humans. So if you think closely, how can these two different perspectives of a person influence each other? Religious beliefs can affect politics in how the people with that specific religion use their religious beliefs as guidance in achieving their political goals.
From the book Global Politics, it was said that when you think of religion and global politics, you will immediately think of Islamic world. I think the author made this example because Islamic world or Islam to be exact is a very strict religion. From what I know, they value their religious beliefs very much that is connected to any decisions they will make especially when it comes to political goals. They have Islamism for them to continue living with both their religious beliefs and politics. This is their way to become modern without having to lose their values and beliefs. But along with these, they have been already convicted as people who are violent and their religion may seem to be the core of this violence. Because when you say Islam or Muslim, people may immediately think that that person is a terrorist. Their religion is already being tainted with their unconventional way of pursuing political achievements.
But of course, not all religions are aimed for violence in taking in global politics. Some religion uses their beliefs in building new bases of mass popular support. A religious institution is also capable of forming alliances of the sort traditionally seen in global politics (Mandaville, 2008). But some believes that the church should be separated from the state. Some say that this is so because of the differences between cultures. Different religions have different beliefs, and this makes the connection between other people or countries hard or impossible because of cultural and religious differences. And this could result into more complications and hindrance for globalization.
I think even if we separate or put religion and politics together, it will always have the same effect. I think religious beliefs will always serve as guidance for global politics or it can also be hindrance for political goals. Either way religion will somewhat control politics because maybe religion is more powerful than politics will ever be.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
What happens if we don't think in HUMAN TERMS?
When we say Human, what immediately come to our minds? The best description for HUMANS is they're species who are capable of thinking, rationalizing and speaking because of their advanced and developed brains. Compared to other species, we humans are the only species capable of language and development. Because of these advantages, as thousands of years passed we were able to adapt to environmental changes and improve our human lives. But of course, I think what really separates us from animals and other living things is our ability to feel and express emotions. We express love, sorrow, pain, etc. But from what I also remember from a homily while attending a Sunday mass, we, humans have also our spirit. This spirit serves as our life, meaning that our existence shouldn't value worldly things because these things don’t really make us HUMANS. We humans are always in search for a higher cost in our lives. We have this belief that someone higher than us or divine is the cost and the source of our lives.
So now that I've described what a HUMAN is. I think when someone says that we should think in human terms, it only means that a person should never forget his identity of being human. For many years, the changes people have gone through can be seen not only physically, mentally and socially but also with their environments. Of course, as being superior to other beings, we are the one responsible for changing this world. But during these changes that the world and us are facing. I think that being human helps face the challenges and make it positive for our race. It is a shame though to admit that sometimes we forget that we are humans, capable of mistake and errors, we sometimes think that we are infallible that we do drastic changes in our lives that resulted into negative lifestyle and habits. We sometimes forget that as humans, we should also do our best to keep the values and principles that we had because of changing times.
Globalization, I believe has both negative and positive effects in our lives. Globalization has helped us improve and make our lives easier but I also think in some way it is destroying our ability to think as humans. We shouldn't let technology or any other things make us forget of how to think as a human being. We should always remind ourselves of our human capabilities and limits, these have helped us improved our lives so it shouldn't be a hindrance. I think that thinking in HUMAN terms is the reason why humans became superior to other living things. Because nowadays, other things are capable of thinking but thinking is not the only component that helps us survive this world. It is our entire definition of being HUMAN that makes us progressive and adaptive to changes.
As I've said being human means being able to feel and think at the same time and also having this spirit and feeding this spirit. If we don't forget about the human characteristics described above, we know what path to go to, we are aware of the future and we know how to make the world a better place to live in.
So now that I've described what a HUMAN is. I think when someone says that we should think in human terms, it only means that a person should never forget his identity of being human. For many years, the changes people have gone through can be seen not only physically, mentally and socially but also with their environments. Of course, as being superior to other beings, we are the one responsible for changing this world. But during these changes that the world and us are facing. I think that being human helps face the challenges and make it positive for our race. It is a shame though to admit that sometimes we forget that we are humans, capable of mistake and errors, we sometimes think that we are infallible that we do drastic changes in our lives that resulted into negative lifestyle and habits. We sometimes forget that as humans, we should also do our best to keep the values and principles that we had because of changing times.
Globalization, I believe has both negative and positive effects in our lives. Globalization has helped us improve and make our lives easier but I also think in some way it is destroying our ability to think as humans. We shouldn't let technology or any other things make us forget of how to think as a human being. We should always remind ourselves of our human capabilities and limits, these have helped us improved our lives so it shouldn't be a hindrance. I think that thinking in HUMAN terms is the reason why humans became superior to other living things. Because nowadays, other things are capable of thinking but thinking is not the only component that helps us survive this world. It is our entire definition of being HUMAN that makes us progressive and adaptive to changes.
As I've said being human means being able to feel and think at the same time and also having this spirit and feeding this spirit. If we don't forget about the human characteristics described above, we know what path to go to, we are aware of the future and we know how to make the world a better place to live in.
WELCOME!
I am Leizel Marie G. Avila. A Third year, BS-Psychology student of De La Salle University - Manila. This will be my blog account exclusively for my GLOBDEV class. Feel free to read and even comment on my blogs. Ciao! :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)