Finals: An End of Year Reflection

Overall, I'd say that this year has been a pretty stressful year- American Studies is by far the class that I'm most sad to see go, though. It's definitely the highlight of my school day, a class where you're actually rewarded for talking! Junior year schoolwork hasn't been kind to me (Nor most, I would think) in terms of allowing me proper amounts of sleep and socialization. This seems to be a New Trier ritual year though, and we get the freedom of being seniors after it ends, which is nice to think about. After which, of course, I'm off to college (presumably, gap year may be included). I've written a fair bit on the educational system and structures on this blog here, and it's certainly an aspect of pride that I've survived New Trier's grueling junior year. I'd like to think that I developed as a person during this year, and especially during this class. I know for a fact that I learned how to make sick powerpoints, as well as picked up some new author names I hadn't heard of before. It was the first time I'd had a lot of the discussions that we did in a classroom setting, which provided an interesting new perspective on it. Regardless, it was certainly a fun time, and provided a much needed respite from the horrors of Math.

Ireland: Green & Rainbow

Ireland is a historically conservative country, never really pointed at as a shining beacon of progressiveness by...well, pretty much anyone. That is up until now. Very recently, Ireland has overwhelmingly passed a democratic vote to allow gay marriage, landing them as the first country to do so in the world. Now, while this is amazing and all, I'm sure you're wondering "Hey, this is a blog about America, what's it got to do with that?" Good question, you! See, Irish-American ties have historically been a lot stronger than most countries, at least culturally. The sheer amount of Irish Americans around have seen to that (Myself being one of them). Much as Irish traditions spread over to the US, it's my hope that this new wave of tolerance does as well.

Memetic Futures

The internet, though a wonderful tool in many aspects, has brought quite a few interesting twists (to say the least) to western society. It’s sped up communications to the point of instantaneous transmission, leading to what used to be considered only time enough for a rush-job into perfectly adequate time for completing an assignment or project. Though this has obvious implications for business and other more formal aspects of our li(v)es, the effect that I’d like to focus on is that of our culture. Internet culture is a thing now, and despite growing up with it it’s still confusing and surprising to myself now and then. However, one of the most prevalent things that internet culture has created is the “meme”, usually an image or phrase that communicates an idea that is usually imbued with humorous connotations then. 

These memes used to become popular through a few image-boards, posting them and then making fun of how simplistic or counter-intuitive they were, or even just some mildly funny aspect of it that was blown way out of proportion to make it ironically humorous. The latter portion of this is where the seeds for the present were sown, in shameless irony. Back before the turn of the decade, memes were generated at a relatively low rate, perhaps a new one popping up every few weeks, maybe once a week if it was a really sizzling day. These elder-memes would be posted with frequency at the time of origination, but then quickly toned down until it became one of the whole pool of memes, never being over-used or relied upon to create a punchline in and of itself. Around 2012 though, that all started to change. Memes were suddenly being produced at a much higher rate, the internet catching onto the idea of them and having quite a blast while doing so. For a span of a few years, the web kept churning them out at ever increasing speeds- until it started to leak. 

                           One of the earlier memes, Shoop da Whoop, based on a Dragonball Z parody

Suddenly, brands and stores started to sell and produce physical copies of memes, be it on clothing or other items. The internet’s meme culture was seeping out into the real world, and this led to only more memes being created. The whole internet was swept into a veritable meme-frenzy, producing dozens a day and posting them everywhere it could. The lifespan of a meme’s originality and humor was no longer months or even years, it became days if not hours. The natural progression of this would be for the dead horse to just be buried and done with it, but then irony crept into the mix. 

Around 2014, horrifically overused memes started to be posted again, only this time with the context of ironically laughing at them. People were no longer finding humor in the actual content of the meme, but instead in the notion of it being laughed at in the first place. It reached the level of meta-irony around early 2015, where even the irony wasn't funny anymore to the majority crowd. Instead of being original and coming up with different ideas, they instead added another layer of irony- posting an already ironic meme and laughing at how un-ironic the posting of it became. The signifiers of irony and humor became one in the same at this point, something no longer being considered entertaining unless it was an ironic, self-referential mockery of itself. 

This too spilled over, reaching what I would consider to be a boiling point when someone ironically spent 5000$ on purchasing “rare pepes” from a seller on ebay (or even more, though this bid likely didn't go through)- images of a poorly-drawn frog that were considered funny just due to the irony attached with posting them. An ironic purchase of an ironically ironic image that was put up for sale ironically in the first place. Proof of purchase was then posted ironically on many sites, making people ironically laugh at the expenditure of cash. That’s six layers of irony, in case you weren’t counting. At some point, this has to reach a point where it can’t sustain itself. The ironic tirade will have to crash and burn at some point, as we’re quickly approaching just laughing at the concept of irony itself. So what will the future hold for internet culture, and the real world culture that it’s slowly but surely osmosing into? Only time will tell, but I sure hope it won’t be ironic. 

The Surveillance State Part 4: A Watchful Eye

So, we've already covered the fact that the NSA's data analyzing methods are horribly inept and don't really achieve much other than simply stumbling over themselves in an attempt to catch nebulous "terrorists"- Though that might not be the only reason for their actions.  Another explanation for their actions is that of control. Surveillance is, after all, a method of exerting power. Conscious or not, the effect that being surveilled has on people is certainly tangible. Take the example of the Panopticon (an architectural idea turned thought experiment made by Jeremy Bentham). It's a prison where there's only one central watchtower with an outer coating such that the windows in it are indistinguishable from the walls. The prison walls themselves form a circle around the watchtower and the yard around the watchtower, the prisoners milling about in that field between the two structures. The interesting part is this: The prison gate is open with no guards by it. So why don't the prisoners just bolt for it and run? It's a fairly intuitive answer- Because they're afraid. They have no idea whether they're being watched or not from inside the watchtower, and if so what weapons the guards inside have trained on them. They don't know about any of these things for certain, but even the mere idea of being surveilled is enough to make them police their own behavior. And that is the beauty of surveillance for a control technique. It makes people follow rules without having to enforce an actual punishment most of the time. The application that this thought experiment has for American society as it is now is quite frightening. If this is indeed the government's rationale, then why are they still using police (in ever increasing amounts as well) to enforce law? That's still a discussion to be had.

The Surveillance State Part 3: Pragmatic Problems

Okay, so we've already covered that the NSA has been attaining absolutely MASSIVE amounts of data and information on everything than everyone's doing in the US- and abroad too (Lookin' at you, Merkel). This begs the obvious question of what they're going to do with all of this data...And of course the response given by the NSA is that they're going to be using it to fight off the terrorists. Specifically the brown ones with the turbans, but those are randomly selected of course. Be that goal as it may, it could seem obvious how surveillance techniques would help. If we collected data on the terrorists and learned what they were plotting, obviously we could implement countermeasures to protect against a second 9/11 from occurring...right? Well, it's not as idyllically simple as that, unfortunately enough. The reason why the NSA is collecting so much data is because they can't be sure if any one little bit is the next clue to a terrorist attack. However, this means that they need to sift through all of the data in order to find this, and they only have a vague idea of what they're looking for. It's like searching for a needle in the Saharan desert, except the needle may not even exist in the first place. This work requires and incredible amount of manpower that the NSA only has a fraction of, leading to the vast amount of data either never being processed and simply shoved into the backfiles or being looked at months after it was ever relevant. This inept phenomenon is called information overload, and it's happening as I type this out right now. It's clearly not working, so why does the NSA continue to chug along? Find out next time, as the junior theme crusade continues...

The Surveillance State Part 2: Surveillance in Modern Day America

There can't be any discussion of modern day US surveillance practices without name-dropping Ed Snowden at least once. He was really the first major whistle blower on the NSA in the information age, offering an insight into the inner workings of the surveillance-machine that most Americans didn't even know was working behind the scenes. He provided thousands of government documents to back up his claims as well, shifting the discussion about surveillance from one characterized by hypothetical scenarios to one of facts. The amount of data being collected was huge- But wait, that's not the right word to use. See, this was one of the things that Snowden revealed, is that almost every word used by the NSA in press releases and congressional interviews is specifically defined within NSA legal code. Data can only be considered "collected" if a human eye has looked over it. Operating on a more common-sense definition of collection, the NSA has attained billions of times the amount of data they say they've collected. Using various broad sweeping programs and tools such as dragnets, the NSA operates under a collect-it-all mentality in this modern day and age, sifting through the data afterwards. There are quite a few problems with this approach, which will be addressed in the next post in this mini-series...

The Surveillance State Part 1: A history of surveillance in the US

The US's relationship with surveillance is something that has always been tumultuous. Going as far back as the splitting of our nation from the redcoats, the independence movement had meetings in secret so as to avoid the watching eye(s) of the British empire. That was back when the US was the underdog though, and didn't benefit from being the one on the other side of the looking glass. Fast forward a few centuries, and you get US government gleefully wiretapping suspected mafia and mob members, attempting to get the evidence that they needed to throw them in jail- Which they did, of course. This successful usage of new surveillance technology made it more apparent to the government that this was something that they could use in more ways, culminating in the Watergate scandal that every other scandal seems to be suffixed with today. This was still back in the 1970's though, when public opinion of surveillance was horror instead of apathy. Nowadays...well, that's going to be in the next post in this junior-theme extravaganza.

Don't Pass Go, Don't collect 200$

Obama's known as a president who isn't shy on issuing executive orders. Executive orders are essentially bills that don't have to go through congress that have basically the same authority, though congress can veto an executive order with enough support (or lack thereof depending on whose side you're on). The advantages of executive orders are quite obvious- they get past the intentional deadlock that is the United States Federal Government and get things done. However, the question that's posed then is when is one of these XO's justified? According to Judge Andrew Hanen , not this time. In a case about Obama's recent immigration XO surpassing his authority, 26 states collectively sued Obama in federal court. The Judge deemed that it was indeed an overstepping of Obama's boundaries, which resulted in the program being indefinitely paused. The outcome of this suit is that the upset states can now continue on to sue further, to get the program shut down forever.

Do you think that Obama's XO was an acceptable usage of his authority? 

AUMF: Authorized Usage of Military Force

ISIS/ISIL has been quite the hot topic as of late in both the mass media and the offices of many important political leaders of our country. The behavior of this group is absolutely horrific, obviously, but there's something just a bit unsettling the way the media has been portraying them to me. The rhetoric routinely used about how the US needs to protect itself and its interests by going in there and beating up the bad guy is being repeated by so many news organizations that the question has no longer become "Should we invade?" but instead "How much should we invade?" This is further replicated in national politics by Obama's recent request for congress to authorize strikes against the so-called Islamic State. The reason that this is somewhat problematic for me is two-fold: First, it falls back upon terrorist rhetoric, and secondly it assumes that the correct thing for the US to do is to invade another country(ies).

The word terrorist is quite a fickle one. Everyone assumes that they know what classifies someone as a terrorist, but no one's really ready to defend that definition. We jump to slap the the label of terrorist on any extremists in the middle east, but you only get wide-eyed stares when you suggest that the US government's actions might just be terrorist-esque as well. Yet, when asked what makes a terrorist a terrorist, the usual definition is just someone who uses terrorist activities to forward a political goal. US foreign policy, specifically in the middle east, has oft inspired and caused terror along the people there. I mean hell, there are kids there who are afraid of blue skies  due to US drone strikes. The result of this implicit double standard is an uneven portrayal of violent state-based actions. Furthermore, the US's terrorism is "justified" by targeting those who we call terrorists in the middle east. This logic seems to suffer a lack of any sense of objectivity, only feeding the state war machine.

Speaking of war machines: Holy shit, US middle eastern policy. America has been involved in middle eastern domestic politics since 1949 when it supported a coup in Syria, and we've had troops continuously in there for longer than I've been alive. Despite this lengthy invasion, it rarely affects US domestic life (Arguably in no meaningful way since 9/11). This is a part of the reason that this  never-ending sequence of wars continues to rage on. Another aspect of it is that US intervention in other countries is no longer something that citizens (and the world) are shocked by. It's become the status quo- it's more abnormal if the US doesn't have it's hand in some other country's cookie jar. And in my humble opinion, a country where we're constantly bombing other places in the world doesn't exactly sound like the shining city on a hill. 

America 4 lyfe

With the "big game" having taken place pretty recently, I (and every red white and blue blooded American) am still buzzing on the high of having my favorite team win- the Patriots. Though it may or may not have come down to a terribad decision by a certain coach in the last crucial moments, that's not what I want to focus on in this post. We all clearly know the furor and zealotry that occur around this special American event, but that raised the question in my mind- Why do we glorify this event so much?

After thinking about it for a while, I narrowed it down to a couple causes. First and foremost is the fact that corporations benefit greatly from having a high concentration of Americans watching a single program. For advertising purposes, it's a gold mine for these companies just due to the sheer reach of the ads. This is evident in how ingrained the famed Superbowl ads have become in our culture. Hell, I know some people who don't even watch it for the game, but rather just to see the best that these mega-corps have come up with. Secondly, I think that the feeling of belonging that emerges from team sports is something that many people feel very cozy with. Major football team fan-hood is, essentially, a tribal structure where we wave colors and shout names of the team that we (usually arbitrarily) support. This allows people to easily identify those who are "in" and those who are "out" of their respective groups. Now, while not all people take football as seriously as others (myself included), the feeling is still there. I cheer on the Patriots despite only knowing about 2 of their players names, tops.

Overall, it's not really about the sport itself. It's much more centered around the culture surrounding it and the corporations pumping money into it.

The Accuracy of History

Finals are on the mind, and the American studies one is certainly on mine. I've always loved writing essays, and I love philosophy, so the two are often intertwined throughout my educational career. As such, when I heard that the final was about the differentiation between fact and constructed conceptions of history, I was stoked. I'd recently been dipping into Derrida's works and his ideas. One that I've found to be particularly fascinating is his conceptions on how accurately we can learn historical events. There isn't any real "truth" behind the historical accounts that we learn about, given how we never lived through them. They're at best second hand recounts, and usually much more distant than that. Every link on the chain to you adds another filter of bias, predispositions, and slant to the image that is that snapshot of history. Then, when it finally gets to you, it's no longer a pure depiction of the event that took place. It's an image of an image of an image of an image...etc. On the other side of this, I can't really think of a better way to learn history. There is no real objective way, given the current technology we have, to experience the past first hand. Thanks a lot, doc Brown.

#JeSuisCharlie

The Charlie Hebdo attack was a horrific event. The lives of all those lost were taken too soon, and for what purpose? Because they were mentally ill? Perhaps it was due to a violent culture surrounding them? Was it because they were Muslims?

No, no, and no. It's because they were assholes. The rest of it, their religion included, are all just excuses and ideas used by them to mask the real reason they did it. They were just assholes. Going around and pointing fingers at all muslims, or all people with brown skin doesn't do anything to address the issue of assholes being assholes. In fact, it only generates more assholes. Spreading bigotry and religious discrimination does nothing but allow assholes to find new reasons and flags to wave, causes to point to as they continue to carry out their terrible deeds. 

Tokenism and Diversity

TV tokenism, as we've been discussing in our American Studies course, is an issue that plagues the most popular modern media. The way I see it, the issue stems from the noble-hearted, but ill thought-out diversity initiative pushed forward by the networks, cable, and all the other little special snowflake channels. The problem I have with it is that it makes these TV programs (Along with many other aspects of life in our western society) embrace diversity for the sake of diversity. This is the wrong foundation to go about diversity with. A cast shouldn't be diverse merely to fit a quota. It should be diverse because of the diverse amount of people available. Falling into the logic of numbers is essentially saying that X amount is just the right amount of non-white people to have on the screen in any given show, which sort of defeats the whole purpose of the diversity initiative in the first place. As a concept, TV diversity is certainly a good thing, but it's certainly been implemented in the botchiest of piss-poor ways.

The Newest of Years

The new year is a rather common celebration, be it through a ball dropping in some lit up square, fireworks, or any numerous other traditions. One of these traditions that's commonly practiced and has become a part of popular culture is the creation of resolutions. Now, while personal resolutions are grand and all, I think that the US needs to make some resolutions on a whole:

1. Be more environmentally conscious. As I've voiced in prior blog-posts, the environment is pretty damned important. Not only does it have intrinsic value on its own, but it also is key to the survival of a creature called "the human". The US has had no shortage of environmental issues for it to tackle.

2. Be wary of becoming a police state. The tragedies that struck the US in the latter half of 2014 weren't unique, that's to be certain. Many others have died at the hands of the police, both unjustly and in split-second bad decisions. However, these recent events are just what lit the powderkeg. Discontentment with this state of cops being essentially allowed to murder as they choose without punishment has drawn attention to the issue of increasing police power. Lets just try to kill less of our own civilians this year.

3. Balance the budget. Nah, I'm just kidding. After all, these are resolutions I hold somewhat realistic hopes that the US government can actualize.

The Greatest Machine of Them All

Winter break is a time for rest. A time for relaxation, for fun, and to forget about all the stress and problems slapped in our faces by school. Well, until it's time to come back that is. January 5th, we all need to get our timecards handed back to us and punch in once more, facing the grueling grind until finals and then onwards. While a break might seem like a good thing at first, it does have the unfortunate effect of sorting our time into neat little boxes. Always obsessed with order, our society's gotta have carefully set times that it's okay to relax in. These are the hours you work, and these are the hours you play. After all, this is the only way to keep the cogs in the machine turning regularly.

Though this rigid structure might be helpful for keeping society at its maximum efficiency, there's still plenty of room to resent it. Namely on the grounds that efficiency isn't all that good. Stating that in today's world is seen as basically treason. The economic system is built on growth, and the only way to keep that growth at acceptably cancerous levels is by squeezing every drop of work out of our fingertips. Efficiency is the altar our society worships at, always with money on our minds. Well, what if we just all, y'know, chilled for a moment? Maybe even more than moment. Take a step back and re-evaluate our priorities. Why are we working this hard? Is it even for a cause we believe in, or is it for a nebulous promise of future enjoyment? A re-evaluation of the fundamentals of our system is long overdue, and asking these questions is the first step to that.

He sees you when you're sleeping...and all the time

Lets talk about the elf on the shelf. It's a fun concept at first, a children's book that also comes with an  fun doll to play hide and seek with, Christmas themed to boot. Looking closer at it, it suddenly becomes a lot less friendly. The elf on the shelf's book details how he reports back to Santa every night on the behavior of the children. Furthermore, if the children touch the elf, the magic is destroyed and they get no presents from Santa. This essentially puts the children in a microcosm of a fascist surveillance state.  With every move observed by the elf and punishment threatened at misbehavior, it conditions the children to follow authority merely due to being watched. The kids have never actually had Santa never visit them due to the elf reporting bad behavior, but the threat is enough. The spectre of no-Santa is enough to keep them obedient under constant surveillance, which the elf does through magic. Any attempt to resist the state...sorry, elf, by touching him results in the magic being destroyed and no presents given. Quite the interesting moral we're teaching these children at such a young age, that the tool of surveillance is so powerful that merely interfering with it delivers punishment.

Ah, Winter...I think?

Well, it's December now. Quite a raging snowstorm out there, right? Wait a second, that's not snow...That's not snow at all! It's mild outside, and I barely need a coat to walk to school everyday. What gives, old man winter?

This wacky weather is most likely the doing of some weird temperature factors, probably wind fronts and the like. However, it's a very good starting point for a discussion about climate change. Environmental concerns are oftentimes shoved to the side in favor of the next humanitarian crisis, with much more emphasis being placed upon the poor, crying faces of people by the media instead of the dangerous effects we're already beginning to see due to our irresponsible treatment of Earth as a species. Unfortunately, the planet doesn't have a face. It can't easily tug at our heartstrings, biologically programmed to care for those that look like us. To many, it's just the ground beneath our feet. But in actuality, it's far more than that. It's all of our homes, our mother, and our only provider. If we destroy it, we'll essentially be setting fire to the building we're standing right in the middle of.

While the warm weather might be nice now, it won't be nice all the time. Acknowledging our irresponsible behavior is the first step in solving it, and today's a good a day as any.

Thanks to those forgotten

The time of year is rolling back around when we're supposed to give thanks. Well, at least in the United States of America. That's the only place that matters though, right?

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot to be thankful for. Like the fact that I'm a cisgendered, straight, white, wealthy, male human. I have to deal with very little structural oppressions in my day-to-day life, and pretty much the only box on the privilege test I don't tick off is faith. And despite the comfy seat my birth and biological makeup gives me, I think that a time of thanks is also a time to acknowledge the reason I have the things I do. Which is considerably less peachy than stuffed turkey and cranberry sauce. America, believe it or not, wasn't always home to Uncle Sam. Indians, as we still like to call them (Despite the fact that we knew they weren't from India about 5 minutes after good ol' Columbus hit the shoreline) were here first.

Native Americans, being the original people here, were a bit of an issue for the colonizing dreams of the European sailors. So, they scummed it out. Intentionally or not, they distributed blankets and other such goods carrying deadly diseases and germs to the Native American populace. It's estimated that about 90% of the total population was killed by infection (Cook, Noble David Born to Die, p. 13) , which left a skeletal force to resist the European invasion when it came full-force. 10% of a people isn't enough to even come close to winning a war against battle-ready Europeans armed to the teeth, leading to the birth of the US of A.

Now, some might say that "Hey, well look at all of the cool new things Europeans brought the Native Americans", such as new technology, advanced metalworking, and medicine. This, however, is greatly overshadowed by the genocidal effect of their arrival. Who cares about how much medicine is given AFTER 90% of the population is dead? That's essentially chopping a mans arm off and slapping a sesame street band-aid on the stump with a pat and a smile.

So, in this time of thanks, I'd like to give thanks not just to the people who are directly present in my life (My friends, family, and kickass teachers), but also those who aren't noticed everyday merely on the account of them being dead. I choose to look down at the ziggurat of Native American corpses our nation is built upon and acknowledge their plight and the atrocities committed against them as the cornerstone of the USA.

These souls are 2 dark: part 2

Constant death wears on you, after a while. Many a time, the game has caused me to toss my controller down and take a break from it out of frustration. This, in a dark fashion, mirrors life.  We stumble through life, sometimes even striking gold (Or in Dark souls II's case, a large soul), but without concrete knowledge that that really IS success. Why do we continue our journeys when we know the end is only, and always going to be our own death, usually to great anger on our parts? Though this point of view might appear to be vehemently nihilistic, there's actually a kernel of hope buried in there. The message that I read from the seemingly endless black pit is one of self-determination. Not in the sense of an iron will, but like a compass. There may be no objective reason we keep on throwing ourselves down the path, but we still do it. This is due to our own drive for it, something that we've fashioned for ourselves. There really doesn't need to be a "truth" in order to justify continuing soldiering on, all we need is a declaration from ourselves that "this is what I'm going to do". Regardless of reason (or lack there-of) we can do things. We have the agency to do this. Despite knowing that death is the only thing that welcomes us with open arms at the end of it all, we can create our own meaning for it. It's not all just a black screen with a morbid declaration upon it. Fearing death must mean there's a reason for us to be alive, even if that reason is entirely self-conjured.

These Souls are 2 Dark: Part 1

Dark souls II is a great game. It came out in March of this year and brought a lot to the table, with it being a shoe-in for at least a nomination for GOTY (Game of the Year) of 2014. It was a direct sequel to the critically acclaimed Dark Souls, which won the GOTY back in 2011, carrying that legacy and weight from the day it was announced. The game doesn't disappoint, continuing the series famed difficulty and challenge. I'm a huge fan of the series, so I highly anticipated it (and may have missed a day of school when it came out), so I was ecstatic when I heard new downloadable content might be being released for it. Which, of course, led to me playing through the game again. During my newest playthrough, I thought about the storyline and setting a lot more than I had previously, and I realized something:Your character has no concrete motives for struggling through the mess they're put in. They're cursed with a seemingly incurable affliction, which turns them undead. Unlike common zombie stereotypes, your character is very much in control and present when undead. It just makes them unable to die for good. Your character, though never voicing their own opinion, can be vaguely assumed to want to break free from this curse and attain a final rest. Only a few guiding forces are present in the game, and all of them echo the same thing as the others: Seek souls.  No reason is given for this order, just a few chuckles from the old crones in the beginning and a promise from the emerald herald that I'll find what I want if I get the souls. In accordance with the game's difficulty, you die. A lot. Every time you die, the game restarts you at the latest bonfire you'd visited. No breaks, just instant reincarnation with your healthbar slightly smaller each time. The only inevitability I know booting it up is that I'm going to see the famed "You died" screen.