I was not at all surprised by Basam’s responses to any of the questions asked in class. Perhaps three years ago I would have been, but since coming to Penn State and working side by side with people from all regions of the world, I am not at all surprised. There is often a disconnect between the way we perceive people and the way they actually are. In America, we view the entire world in stereotypes: Everyone who lives in Africa is black; the Middle East is a big desert; all the buildings in Eastern Europe are falling down. Obviously none of these stereotypes are true, but living in the bubble that is America, they often flourish in our minds. The truth is that people everywhere are quite similar. They are motivated by the same goals and aspirations.

My eyes were first opened to my own ethnic ignorance in the summer of 2008. I was working a summer job at Penn State, and one of my coworkers was an Iranian. At first I was hesitant to ask him questions. I quickly formulated many opinions about him. He was probably a Muslim. He probably lived in the desert. He probably hated America. After a few days working with him I began to ask him about his homeland. He joked about being a Canadian (he has a green card from Canada), but then gave me some enlightening information. Tehran, the capital of Iran and the city in which he grew up, is not all that unlike an American city, he told me. People over there dress a lot like people here, they carry cell phones, have Facebook pages, and many are not religious at all. They do not all support the government; in fact only small minority supports the government. The more I talked to him, the more I realized we had a lot in common. We are still friends to this day. I often joke with him about his position as an Iranian spy and his desire to steal our nuclear secrets. Every Iranian I have met has had a great sense of humor.

We are often surprised when we meet people from other countries and realize that they are not so different from us. We should not be so surprised. We should not believe everything we hear on TV or read in the newspaper because the extreme voices are always the ones that come through the clearest. Most people are motivated by the same things as us.

I don’t necessarily agree that some of the examples given in class are nepotism. Nepotism is defined as favoritism granted to relatives or friends regardless of merit. In class it seemed as though Sam was suggesting that any recommendation for a position is nepotism. Let’s say for example that I worked with a professor at Penn State for three years. I spent a lot of time carrying research in his lab and even made a significant discovery that brought him some measure of success as well. Then, come time to graduate, he saw fit to recommend me for a job with people who are connected to him. Is that an example of nepotism? I would certainly have to disagree.
Not all connections or “hook ups” can be defined as nepotism. To a large extent connections are important for employers so that they can have some confidence that their newly hired employees who might look good on paper aren’t hopelessly incapable of working their new jobs. Furthermore, is showing someone (who then goes on to recommend you) that you have the ability to work well not an order of merit in itself? Sure sometimes people are given positions that they really don’t deserve just because they have friends in high places, but ultimately I think a good number of gains that in this class would be presumed to stem from nepotism are actually well deserved.
Now back to the question at hand. Would I active try to not benefit from nepotism if the opportunity presented itself? This would depend on the nature of our definition of nepotism, but following the logic outlined above, I do think that I would actively avoid benefiting from nepotism. If I truly thought that I would gain an advantage that I didn’t deserve from simply knowing someone, I would try to not pursue that advantage. I have done this in the past. Two years ago I was looking for a summer internship. I interviewed with many companies, one of which the CEO just so happened to be my next door neighbor. I knew that I could walk next door and ask him to recommend me for the job, and I knew that if I did that I would certainly get it. I did not do this. I went through the regular interview process without telling anyone that I knew the CEO very well. In March I got a call from the company that the job was mine. It was only after arriving and starting the job that I told anyone there about my relationship with their CEO. It gave me a great sense of accomplishment to know that I got this job on my own steam rather than simply because I knew someone. I don’t think I would have felt the same way about it had I sought his recommendation. Hopefully I will be able to keep this up in the future because I wholeheartedly believe that true nepotism is wrong. Let’s just keep straight the real definition of nepotism.

The class raised some interesting points on terrorism and the hatred many Middle Easterners have toward America. It did seem as though many students in the class changed their impression on terrorism from the beginning to the end of this lecture. My view, however, did not change. I always could see why so many Middle Easterners hate America. We go into many of their countries and drop bombs on a daily basis. We demand their resources and harass their people. Despite this, I don’t think it is justifiable for them to commit acts of terrorism, and I think many living in the area would also agree. These acts do not solve their problems – they only make them worse.

People are often blinded by their anger and rage. Terrorists are an extreme example of this. By killing people who they perceive as “the enemy,” terrorists might get some degree of satisfaction, but ultimately it is unfounded. Take 9/11 for example. I’m sure the terrorists who committed this act were very proud of themselves after succeeding. They may have viewed it as retaliation – getting an eye for an eye against the country that had been killing their countrymen with airstrikes. But ultimately, the fallout resulted in the death of many, many more of the same people they felt they were fighting to protect. Furthermore, the attacks of 9/11 made the Americans feel as though they had justification to retaliate. Conflict like this will always continue until one group says, “Enough.” The violence will always continue until someone offers an olive branch.

Furthermore, terrorist attacks almost never target the true people who are behind the mistreatment of the terrorists. In this sense, the terrorists are just as bad or even worse than the ones who are oppressing them in the first place. Violence rarely solves problems. It usually just makes them worse. Probably the biggest result of terrorist attacks is the creation of more ill will toward the groups who commit them and maybe even the creation of terrorists on the side of the attacked. This vicious cycle creates exponential mayhem.

I think although terrorists may be mistreated, the acts they commit lend more to the problem then they help. Their actions are just as disgusting and reprehensible as those who repress them, maybe worse. Understanding the motives behind their actions is a good thing, but condoning the violence they perpetuate certainly is not. I have always said that maybe we wouldn’t have to worry so much about terrorism if we didn’t spend so much time bombing other countries, but I think we, as a nation, should rise above any terrorist acts that are committed against us. We should go on living our lives and not let terrorism change us because at the end of the day, if we become consumed by the fear terrorism creates, then the terrorists win.

We can argue all day whether or not Barak Obama’s presidency has helped the race movement in the United States. Ultimately our arguments will amount to little avail because the fact of the matter is that in this country we only ever seem to hear the voices that scream the loudest. Those voices are inevitably the extremists whose thoughts and words are not representative of the nation as a whole. Here’s what I think: The simple fact that Barak Obama was elected points to a lessening of the racial gap that has existed between blacks and whites in America. Sure the numbers might not have changed much since his election. Poverty, incarceration, and discrimination figures are still largely skewed toward minority groups, but what did occur in Obama’s election is that we, as citizens of the US, made a statement about our morals and values. Furthermore, around the world the message appears to be the same. Many countries across the globe, including those that have a history of hating Americans, have been very vocal in their support of Obama. I was recently in Spain. Nearly every day Obama’s picture was on the front page, and he was always portrayed in a favorable light. Was this because he is a black president? I don’t know, to them that didn’t seem to matter. What did matter was that he has an intelligent and progressive mindset. I think this points toward a global sentiment that race is meaning less and less everywhere.

Anyone who has had any experience with racism will tell you that Barak Obama is a black man. Maybe in the technicalities of race and ethnicity he is not, but he is certainly not a man who has lived his life free from the effects of discrimination and racism. In this respect his election was monumental, and what may be even more telling of it is the fact that a great many of his voters were young people. I think the presence of this demographic shows the direction the country is headed in. Whether Obama has helped perpetuate this movement during his time in office is not so relevant as is the sheer fact that he was elected in the first place.

Progress in the arena of racism has been steady over the years. Not too long ago, minorities were required by law to use separate bathrooms, drinking fountains, and many other facilities. Today most of us could not imagine discriminating in such ways. I think the passage of time will continue to improve race relations in the US and elsewhere. The fastest growing racial group in the country is “multiracial.” This fact alone points toward racial progress more than almost any other imaginable. Who knows? In a few more decades, we may all be the same anyway.

I think the answer is simple. Comedy can add levity to difficult situations, especially those involving societal problems. Levity makes it far easier to deal with any situation because it allows those involved in it to feel less attached to the thoughts and attitudes associated or expected. Comedy masks the thoughts and wraps them up in a package that is far easier to deliver than a direct statement. In general people don’t like confrontations and they certainly don’t like to feel pressure. Using comedy to present a message typically relieves a lot of the pressure associated with it and makes it far less confrontational.

I also think that when we laugh, we become more comfortable and loose. This changes our attitude and makes us lower our guards, allowing the thoughts we might think but not necessarily say to flow with less resistance. People often don’t talk about racial issues in the first place because it makes them feel uncomfortable or because they are worried that in doing so they may make someone else feel uncomfortable. Comedy changes all of this. I think part of the reason is that a lot of the things comedians say (at least the details) are inherently untrue. In juxtaposing serious issues with lighthearted observations and sarcastic statements, the seriousness is almost lost in the shuffle.

While comedy may allow us to talk about a societal problem more easily, I don’t think that the messages associated with many comedy acts make a real difference in the way people think, act, or perceive a situation. In adding levity to an issue, a lot of the drive and potential for true change is lost. Sure the issue is easier to swallow, but in my life at least, the issues that have had the most profound affect on me were the ones that were difficult to hear, the ones that really put me off guard. By introducing an issue in the context of a joke, the audience is put into a state in which its members are relaxed and not wanting or expecting to deal with a real problem. However, when addressed directly and put on edge about a problem, I think people tend to remember it better. If ingrained with true sensibility about an issue, a person has far better odds of becoming part of the solution to that issue. I’m not saying comedy that addresses an issue is a bad thing; rather, I am saying that if we really want to be tackling societal issues and solving them, we should adopt an approach that is more straightforward and forces people to remember what they have been doing wrong and what they can do to fix the situation.

I can honestly say that in my entire life I have never felt one bit of guilt for being white. I did not choose to be white. It was no conscious decision of my own, just like it was not Al Sharpton’s decision to be black or Ricky Martin’s decision to be Hispanic. I think it is absurd to feel guilty for something you could never hope to have any control over. I also think it does not make sense to feel guilty when the actions of others have created disadvantages for some people in the world. There are plenty of feelings to have toward this type of behavior – anger, pity, shame, the list goes on and on – but guilt should not ever be one of them. Guilt is a feeling very much tied up with the principles of right and wrong. It is a feeling we should have when we have done something we know is wrong, not when we observe something wrong done by a person other than ourselves. Every person is different in his or her own way and the collective thoughts and actions of a group people, let alone an entire race of people, cannot be assumed to be identical to those of a single person in that group.

So instead of feeling guilty when we observe what we view as white privilege, every time we see it we should use it as a means to reinforce our thoughts on the current state of racism. We should think about what we can personally do to change that state and do everything in our power to ensure we do that. Things can change, but in order for change to happen we must continually work to bring it about. Education is the first step, and everyone currently taking Soc 119 is getting that part. However, it is important that we use the knowledge we have used in Soc 119 after we leave the classroom and head back into our everyday lives. Change never comes easy. There are always those who steadfastly resist it, including our own subconscious and the aspects that cause most of us to feel comfort in the familiar. Getting away from these is difficult. I think the best way is to get out and talk to people of all races and cultures. The more time we spend with people who are different from us, the more similarities we see. In essence, maybe it is not even necessary to lose the feelings of comfort we find in the familiar. Meeting people of different backgrounds makes them familiar and makes us more comfortable around them. I think taking the time to get to know people of all backgrounds is important to making us well rounded individuals. I am still working on it myself.

No, I absolutely do not feel guilty about the advantages I have had in life. Starting with the obvious, I had nothing to do with creating or perpetuating the institution of slavery in the United States (as I’m sure is the case for all of you unless there is someone in the class who is over 150 years old). I find it hard to feel guilty for someone else when I feel that I did nothing to cause him or her to be in that situation. I won’t deny that black people have suffered from slavery, and I can fully grasp that some of that suffering may have perpetuated a cycle of poverty and misfortune that still affects some today, however, seeing as I was born at the end of the twentieth century and am currently only 21 years old, I don’t see any reason that I should feel guilty for taking advantage of the opportunities I have been given. In fact, I think that the situation is quite the opposite. Because I have taken advantage of my opportunities, I have put myself into a position where I can learn a lot about the disadvantages members of other races face and maybe even do something to change the way things are. Those of us who are educated on the struggles others face are often the ones who become motivated enough to get out and enact changes to help those who are struggling. Had I not been given the opportunity to go to college, it is unlikely that I would contribute to help those who have not been given such opportunities.

I think it is a good thing to be sensitive to the difficulties caused by deterministic institutions in our world, but it is wrong to feel guilty for taking advantage of the benefits caused by such institutions. Odds are if the tables were turned and those who gained the advantages offered by institutionalized racial prejudice would not act any differently than we do today. Not taking advantage of the opportunities we are offered does not hand them over to be allotted to those less fortunate than ourselves. Quite the contrary, I think by not taking advantage of our opportunities we are contributing to produce more disadvantages and less future opportunity for everyone. Therefore, we should not feel guilty if we are so lucky as to be able to go to live comfortably in a secure family or go to college. I think instead we should seize these opportunities and say, “What can I do to make sure everyone has the same chances I have had?”

I think in many ways America is a cultural bubble. Most of us live in homogeneous communities, where we don’t mix with people who are very different from us. Ethnic communities exist in the United States, but they are often separated from the mainstream populous, occupying a specific area of a town or city rather than being spread out throughout one. Sure we might say we are “Irish” or “Italian” or “German” or “insert distant, far-removed heritage here” but the fact of the matter is that most of us don’t know very much about the cultures we claim to represent. We know the generalities and stereotypes, not much else. Meeting people from different cultures is the cornerstone of realizing that they are not so different from us. In America we do not have many opportunities for such mixing (or maybe we just don’t take advantage of the ones that we do have). The root cause of this phenomenon likely stems from our country’s location – geographically, politically, and socially.

Let’s start with the geographic reasons. We are a country that is insulated from cultural differences by two oceans and Northern neighbors who are just like us. Our only cultural boarder is with Mexico, and we put up a wall to try and keep us separated from them. Even if we opened our boarders to Mexicans and their culture, the sheer size of our country would still limit cultural mixing. Had we grown up under different circumstances (say in Europe), we would have had more opportunities to experience different cultures and wouldn’t be so shocked to learn that people everywhere are generally the same. I think language has a lot to do with this also. When we hear someone speaking a different language or speaking English with a foreign accent, we automatically begin to erect barriers between ourselves and them. We think that they couldn’t possibly be like us. They couldn’t possibly think like us. Had we grown up in a place where we heard different languages and different accents everyday, we probably wouldn’t think twice about hearing either one.

Politically and socially we often put ourselves on a pedestal. How often have you heard it? “America is the greatest country in the world.” I used to believe this unquestioningly as a child. As I got older I began to think more about what it really meant. I also began to travel more and meet people from different countries. Today I laugh when I hear someone say it (which is inevitably followed by, “If you don’t like America, why don’t you get out” or some such shit). I’m not trying to diss America. I just think we should question the merit of any such general statements. I think Sam put it best; odds are whoever says that has not been to all of the others (countries that is). I think this attitude contributes greatly to our astonishment that other cultures could stack up the mighty America.

It makes sense to me that as people become more educated they are less likely to believe that success is mostly a result of hard work. The more knowledge we have of other peoples’ success, the more jaded we become and the more we begin to question whether or not all the hard work we have put in will ever pay off. I think we rarely remember the stories of people who have worked hard to achieve their success (unless they have overcome a very formidable obstacle), and often remember the stories of people who are handed their success. Why is this? Because the latter case arouses our emotions. We ask: Why him? Why her? Why not me? We become angry. Our brains do a better job of storing memories if they have some sort of emotional response attached to them. In this process, we build up a lot of evidence in our minds that success is mostly a result of the connections we have, when this likely is not the case. While connections can help in achieving success, I do think that in most cases, success results from a significant input of hard work.

Here’s my reasoning. A connection for success is rarely beneficial unless it comes from a successful person. Most people are not successful. Most successful people are not looking to give success away and especially not to people who they think will be unsuccessful in using their help. Connections can help, but there is no substitute for hard work. Success breeds success. If you do well in school, you will probably find a good job. If you do well at work, you will probably move up to a better position.

What people often forget is that attitude goes a long way and not only for our own sanity and determination. I can almost guarantee you that a 4.0 student with a winning personality will go far in life in the career sense. Does this mean that this person will be successful? That depends on how you define success. I think we should get away from the common perception that money = success. If we can change our mindset and instead view success as happiness in life, a lot more of us will achieve success. Who can argue that the person who gets up everyday with a huge smile and goes to work at Walmart is less successful than the CEO who makes millions but spends his days angry and depressed?

So now I give some advice for all of our friends who happen to be among those who believes that success is not often a result of hard work: Stop looking for excuses, shut your mouth, and do your work. No one is going to hand you anything.

To tell you the truth, I can’t make confident decisions from a single side of any story. I’m assuming this has something to do with the choices I have made in my life and the experiences that have shaped me into the man I am today. If you read anything I’ve written (and you can look at my other posts to get a taste if you like) I rarely take anything as a certainty. I approach almost every situation with some hesitancy and sensitivity to the fact that I might be wrong or I might not have the entire picture. Even in this post, I said, “I’m assuming this has something to do with the choices I have made,” and not, “this definitely has something to do with the choices I have made.” When Sam asked if the woman who sent her kids to the other school district was a victim of racism, I answered that I don’t know.

It is firmly entrenched into my being to only accept facts as reliable and to study any situation intensely before I can call it fact or not, and I have always been this way. In high school I gravitated towards math and science – I’m studying engineering now. In many respects, I approach societal situations in the same way I would approach a math or science problem. I use pure logic in assessing how I feel about a situation and always try to remove emotions from the mix, but I understand a lot of people do not and cannot do this.

People are often driven by their emotions. Our emotions resonate with us more strongly than do facts and logic. Unfortunately this often leads us to make uninformed decisions and quickly formulate opinions based on incomplete stories. We quickly accept what we are told without question if what we are told emotionally influences us in some way. Here’s an example: One night in February, a man named Amadou Diallo stood outside of his apartment in New York City. Four police officers drove by and, thinking Diallo looked suspicious standing on the street in a crime ridden neighborhood late at night, stopped to question him. When the officers approached Diallo, he ran towards a nearby building and attempted to open the door. When he couldn’t, he reached into his pocket and began to take out a shiny black object. The officers shot Diallo. Were they justified? What would you have done in this situation? Now, what if I told you what Diallo was reaching for in his pocket wasn’t a gun… it was a wallet. He thought that the police officers were trying to mug him. He ran terrified to the building, and when he couldn’t open the door he reached into his pocket to offer his wallet to the “muggers.” Now whose fault is it? Diallo’s? The officers’? What if I told you that Diallo was black? What if he was white? What if it was the first week on the job for these officers? What would you have done in this situation? I’m guessing a lot of you have varied where you place the blame for this death as the story went along. This is a true story and even to this day, depending on whom you ask, the blame is placed on different people. I really don’t know who is to blame for this death, but it has certainly caused a stir in the world of race relations.