Most of the images in this video are likely created and organized to form some form of fear propaganda. The way that the images are organized in this video with the corresponding background music was not done accidentally. The message in this video is clear, and that is to inspire fear and judgment on an entire group of people on the basis of their Islamic background. I am skeptical to watch this film as more than anything other than propaganda, seeing as how I know many individuals of different religious backgrounds than myself who would never act or behave in any of the ways implied in this video.

Another thing that this video ignores completely is the opposite end of the extremist spectrum. For every individual who is an “Islamic extremist,” there are just as many individuals in the world who follow other forms of religious extremist views with the intent to erase the existence of all other dissenting religions from the world as well. The scary apart about using the video in this manner to stir up mass fear is that it only increases the likelihood of other religious extremists will respond in a similar manner. This builds tension among the religious sects on the basis of false information and fear tactics rather than open communication and truth.

What bothers me most about disagreements between extreme individuals in different religious sects is the view that death to those who disagree is the only answer to solve their problems. The main views of most religions are to be compassionate to others and not to kill. So the question is what sociological reason lies behind the manipulation of religious views into extreme standpoints where murder becomes acceptable. This video is not the only example of this occurrence. It also happens in our very own society, where Americans are convinced into supporting war with religious undertones. Politicians use phrases like “God willing,” and “Gold bless our troops,” and “may God be with us to defeat evil” to reinforce the idea that the war has a holy agenda against an evil opponent that threatens to take lives of innocent people. However, the other side has the same identical view of our cause. So the underlying problem is not differences in religious views, but in political spin placed upon the public to sway support in a favorable direction.

The most prominent point made in this video about the US military is its description as a tool of our country, which has taken the sociological form of an empire. Throughout history, no single empire has ever withstood the test of time. Ron Paul addresses this fact in his short speech clip in this video. The reasoning behind this statement is that of the devaluation of an empire’s currency as expansionary practices proceed. If we look at the United States, the US military, and current levels of relative consumption compared to global consumption, the only logical deduction is that the United States is very closely following trends that have historically led to sociological breakdowns of large empire like states.

The foremost cause for concern is the massive spending on the United States military, which as mentioned in class accounted for nearly 50% of all military spending in the world. This spending is tax backed, meaning that citizens ultimately are paying for this military build up, in addition to other forms of consumption and government spending. The amount of consumption is driven even higher in response to the increased military growth. In order to support this high level of consumption, US citizens are looking to international economies to support the desire for consumption beyond economic means, leaving the United States deeply indebted to many nations. This debt is held primarily through the holding of United States Treasury securities, which frighteningly can be printed off or created by the US government at will. Whenever the United States government and Federal Reserve needs more money in circulation to support the economic cycle, the level of Treasury securities in the market is manipulated, therefore altering the money supply and therefore currency valuation. Since the United States dollar currency is no longer gold backed, the only reason it has value at all is due to government guarantee.

However, the use of Treasury securities as a means of debt has led to a decrease in the value of the American dollar. As Ron Paul mentioned in his speech about the decline of empires, the currency devaluation is a major contributing factor. The way it seems now, the dollar is rapidly approaching the inevitable point where the US dollar will no longer be respected internationally, and the US Treasury securities will not be seen as something with a guaranteed repayment. Once our society reaches this point, it may be too late. For then, we will have reached the point of no return where empires historically have deteriorated, and the US could face a similar demise if action is not taken soon.

The problem regarding big oil interests being overly represented in government does not originate solely from massive amounts of money spent lobbying, but rather in the sociological roots of individuals desiring faster and easier methods of economic and personal actions. Since modern society desires faster and newer methods of transportation for business efficiency and for personal transportation, as well as the desire for climate controlled settings, energy demand has skyrocketed in the past 200 years. This desire is met by the production of fossil fuels, which has since led to the development of international corporations that make astronomical profits. Since energy is in such high demand worldwide, these companies have become extremely powerful.

The political power of these companies is a direct result of the enormous financial influence through lobbying. However, the question of how these companies can afford to have such a major influence is based on the root demand of society for such high energy output. So many people are critical of oil company lobbying to government, however they do not see that just about every single person benefits from energy production in this country. It is hypocritical for a someone to claim that they disapprove so strongly of energy company practices in business and in government, yet go and fill up a ten mile per gallon sports car once the cameras are turned off.

The question surrounding this issue is how oil companies can have less political influence even if energy usage is at an all time high and is expected to grow until resources no longer become practical for energy use. And while current political spokespersons are critical of the energy industry, it is likely that the industry is just the modern selection for the heavy lobbying role. When oil is no longer a practical resource or is entirely gone in the future, whether relatively soon or in many years, a new industry will likely fill the role of heavy lobbying to advance business interests. The new lobbying superpowers may be the transportation industry, or agricultural industry, etc. Once the transformation occurs to where a new industry has such strong power that they can influence government, society will likely be critical of their lobbying influence yet still use their products. Maybe society is perpetually critical of political influence despite its unavoidability.

The two most striking statements made in this response are the statement of music as a means of freedom creation and also the statement regarding suicide and its context within the scope of prison sentencing. Throughout history, music has been a social means of creation, and it is only logical that even in social situations where freedom is "limited," as in the prison context, music can be an alternative extension of freedom that one can pursue.

Music has many historical ties to societies, as it has developed in different religious and entertainment sects of societies. All of the societies have developed music as a means of expression and freedom largely independently throughout history. Therefore, the question arises as to whether sociologists can make a connection between freedom, religion, and music. Since the prisoner mentioned that music has allowed him to pursue freedom through guitar playing, it is evident that music has some societal tie to freedom.

Another striking statement is that of suicide in response to one's criminal sentence. The part that surprised me the most was that of suicide as a form of murder, which the prisoner strongly denied that he was. This is an incredibly important distinction, and I could not agree more that suicide is a form of murder, and in fact "playing God." By acknowledging how suicide is a form of murder, the prisoner's statement can imply a potentially important distinction between those accused of murder who are actually guilty and those who are actually innocent. It may be possible to potentially look for similarities between individuals who are willing to take their own life in the situation of sentencing as a possible indication of one's guilt to a crime accused. Those who are more likely to consider murder in any form, including suicide, may be more likely to have tendencies to act violently in society. It is largely unlikely, based on the social restrictions of religions and social norms, that anyone who is accused of a crime that is actually innocent would likely not consider suicide in the same proportion of those who are actually thinking to act in a criminal manner.

This article seems to focus on the source of lottery winners’ unhappiness as the rapid change in sociological standing. Research has shown that the most frequent purchasers of lottery tickets are those individuals in lower socioeconomic classes, which gives support to the argument that winning the lottery would rapidly change the individual’s socioeconomic standing. This rapid change typically leads individuals to try to immediately conform to their new status. Most of this conformity involves large purchases like new cars, homes, RV’s, etc. This then leads the individual into a lifestyle that typically has higher associated expenses. Most notably, higher socioeconomic classes pay more for food and experiences, as well as higher taxes due to larger homes in wealthier areas.

With the combined effects of higher individual expenses, as well as increased recognition and demand for wealth from lottery winners, it logically follows that the vast majority of lottery winners do not experience increases in happiness. These increased stress factors in the individuals’ lives would far outweigh many benefits associated with an increase in disposable income. However, individuals who manage their winnings in a manner that does not emphasize acquiring material possessions or flaunting their wealth typically report being much happier as a result.

However, at this point, the sociology of choices begins to come into play. The question arises of why individuals have the desire for increasing their socioeconomic perception relative to others in society. There is some form of desire that individuals have where they intend to rapidly improve their lifestyles and demonstrate this improvement. This sociological desire to improve one’s lifestyle into a new socioeconomic standing results in the lack of happiness that the winners typically encounter. Therefore, a sociological condition is present where an emphasis on material possessions and wealthy lifestyle living is emphasized over any other form of lifestyle. However, it is problematic that the pursuit of this lifestyle tends to lead individuals to feel even less happy than they were prior to winning the lottery.

This tendency of winning large amounts of money leading to individual unhappiness is something that lottery players should consider when they purchase their tickets. However, if lottery tickets were not sold, then the tax revenue would need to be acquired through other means, leading to higher taxation on everyone in society.

The most interesting aspect of this video is how it really isolates the education system as a form of mass production of standardized individuals, and then uses the methods of standardization (such as GPA) to distinguish between individual abilities in a narrow focus. The education system is demonstrated as one where individuals are forced from a natural way of thinking into a form that fits in a standard box form. As people are introduced into the education system, everything about the process is standardized. Classrooms are set in a squared off room, students sit in square desks, graduate with square pieces of paper to eventually work in a cubicle where they grind out repetitive tasks and using the narrow amount of information that the education system determines has “value.”

This process robs creativity of many individuals, especially in the area of problem solving. The only area where creativity is acceptable and promoted is in art classes, in any level of the education system. These creative abilities are then stifled and not permitted in many other academic areas. The only time creative solutions are encouraged in mathematics and applied sciences is once students reach graduate level courses, which few individuals tend to pursue for a variety of reasons. This implies the idea that it is possible that many of the world’s most intelligent individuals may fall through the cracks of the system and not become leaders who can solve many of the new and pressing problems of today. Because of this system, individuals are pressured into following new ways that would only benefit themselves economically, rather than help find new solutions for society at large. This is ironic because it is society that has shaped this system, and now may be the one that suffers the consequences.

Another interesting aspect of the education system is the transition between it and employment. After experiencing many interviews and the various questions and qualifications that employers seek from applicants, I see a direct difference between the expectations of individuals and the way in which students have been accustomed to behave. All throughout school, the student emphasis has been on individual memorization of material and isolated work. Employers however request research abilities, leadership, and teamwork. These three are almost never encouraged in the education system, even though it is so emphasized in the workforce.

This inmate strikes me as someone who has realized everything wrong he has done in life and has truly learned from his incarceration. His personal reflections on his life prior to imprisonment demonstrate how strongly a single event in life can completely alter the course of life. As evident by stating that he can hardly remember certain events in life, it is apparent that he has completely focused on the single event that led him to imprisonment for a long period of time. This extreme focus on a single event has led the prisoner to find God and forgiveness for what he has done.

The idea of imprisonment brings up the question of its true purpose. The intent in many situations is obviously punishment for criminal actions against society, but in some situations it is a permanent solution to a social problem, namely removing murderers and other serious criminals from society for the rest of their lives. However, as in some situations, life imprisonment seems to almost surpass punishment into the realm of almost torture. As in this case, the prisoner has focused so intently on the single actions that redefined the rest of his future that he has completely forgotten the memories of life prior to this occurrence.

The real sociological question is how social influences that predispose individuals to act in a criminal manner can be changed or stopped. Since none of our actions are truly free or independent, it is inherently implied that other social influences can lead individuals to act in certain ways without his or her knowledge of any of the influences. Since this is apparently the case, we must ask about the fairness of society focusing so intently on the lifelong imprisonment compared to different ways that we could study and determine ways to manage social predispositions toward these tendencies. This way, individuals who are serving life sentences would be much more properly placed in their sentences, while individuals who have potentially been unfairly predisposed to act in criminal manners by forces outside of their control do not have to pay the rest of their lives for actions that they did not freely intend on doing.

This video shows an interesting connection between social conformity and individual freedom. This connection is derived from the desire for social order. As societies establish social order by creating rules everyone must follow, individual actions are refined into a specific, predetermined acceptable form.

An extremely evident example of this process is apparent in education systems, where certain individual actions in elementary school may be “against the rules,” whereas the very same such action may have a less strict rule, or no applicable rule, relevant to it in later years of the education system, namely high school and beyond. This progression of relaxed discipline occurs as students begin to subconsciously follow social patterns established earlier in life by these rules. Some actions, which may have been grounds for punishment at an earlier age, eventually progress into an action in a social context where the individual feels socially awkward.

When an average individual feels awkward in a social situation, as demonstrated in this video, he or she is likely to alter their behavior to conform more to the social norms. Younger individuals, however, do not feel this social pressure; therefore, established rules are created to ensure social order and normality. This notion of order is based on the belief that excessive individual behavior would gravitate more towards chaos in society.

It is ironic how many individual responses have indicated that this video is funny, and while it is entertaining, it shows us about as much about ourselves as the subjects tested. We have all followed social orders established as we were younger, and we continue this pattern as we socially judge others’ actions that do not conform to what is deemed socially “normal.” This is incredibly apparent with various political debates, which I will not get into, as well as our refined individual actions of following daily schedules. Everything from eating at generally predetermined times, to sleep schedules, to socially acceptable hours of the day to call someone, etc. Everything we do in our daily lives has a social stigma of acceptance attached to it. By the nature of following these social guidelines, we are each feeding the process and subconsciously contributing to normality and conformity.

After reading the letter from the inmate as well as different responses by others, I have noticed a common idea, whether explicitly stated or implied. This idea is the statement that many people do not appreciate the freedoms that they have in their lives. This statement occurs in the inmate’s letter, as he recognizes the freedoms lost but also the newly realized freedoms. It also appears in responses in the form of viewing another person in society and stating that he or she does not recognize certain freedoms in life. This brings together an interesting social trend, where the people who point out to others that freedoms should not be taken for granted are typically the individuals who have fewer freedoms than the person to whom they are advising.

What is more interesting is the fact that the inmate acknowledges that he newly appreciates certain freedoms that he holds dearly. This brings about the question of whether or not other inmates have fewer freedoms than the inmate, which would give the inmate grounds for comparison and a reason for why he appreciates the freedoms listed in the letter. This therefore implies that even in prisons, where prisoners have no possibility of parole, there are individuals with different perceptions and acknowledged levels of freedom. This suggests a trend in society of some form of continuum by which levels of freedom are realized and truly appreciated.

This potentially speaks volumes to not only inmates serving life sentences, but also to all members of society, whether in our country or other nations worldwide. If a continuum of freedom recognition exists, it is likely that each one of us is not at the highest level of freedom realization. This indicates that we are each ignorant of free aspects of our lives that we all take for granted. Even if someone says that they are grateful for everything in their lives, they must therefore be lying, because true freedom realization can never be acquired in society. This is a result of the fact that there will always be individuals who have less freedom and more freedom than each of us individually. It must inevitably be accepted that we cannot possibly understand what we take for granted in our lives until we are notified by someone else who does not have the same level of freedom that we have. Society has blinded us from that which we take for granted. If someone mentions that one should be grateful for something in life, it should never be taken lightly. This is especially important since we sometimes cannot even comprehend freedom beyond the realm of freedom we currently know.

Soc 001