8.

Which conception of citizenship is better for outcomes on your issue? A universalistic notion of citizenship? A differentiated notion of citizenship? A transversal citizenship? What would differentiated citizenship look like on your issue? Universal citizenship?


So, I've been sitting here re-reading and understanding universal and differentiated citizenship as both of these seem to have some pros and cons to how they would effect my issue. A universal view of citizenship for my issue would mean that nothing changes, we view at risk youth as at risk youth apply the same laws and rules to them as everyone else. While I think this is important so they know and understand the norms of society and how to live in that society this could also be a disaster. If we apply the same rules all the time that means we aren't recognizing differences, for some it's difficult in their situation to have the same opportunities as other people to lead a successful life. However, I also have an issue with labeling differences because then that makes it seem like these people aren't capable of doing well without help. Plenty of people can make it without their differences being identified and adhered to. This is how differentiated citizenship works and I think that it works for some issues but not for others. I think this is why we have a major issue with things such as affirmative action because we take into consideration other factors like race, and minority status.

As far as my issue goes though, I think in terms of policy it's important to look at a differentiated view of citizenship. With these youth it's important to set them apart from the rest of society to make the appropriate changes to help them go in the right direction. We need to establish what makes this important enough to view the differences to do something about it. Once the government establishes differences they can better handle policy which will help the situation. The likelihood of this happening though I can't really fathom being in the near future given our current economic state, and social programs are getting some money but with new programs and policy being implemented the likelihood of more happening doesn't seem within reach.

Read More......
Sunday, March 28, 2010 Posted in | | 0 Comments »

7.

How does Arendt's concept of totalitarianism and or/propaganda apply to your issue? Apply Benhabib's critique of tying citizenship exclusively to nation to your issue? How does Bosniak's view of non-citizen citizenship apply to your issue?


I think that Arendt's concept of totalitarianism and propaganda apply to my issue in a positive way, if I understand her concept and definition: "the destruction of spontaneous thought and action". To me that means it's eliminating impulse action. If she believes that totalitarianism will eliminate impulse action then in regards to at risk activity we might have lesser numbers. On the other hand it could also not being effective in that while it eliminates spontaneous action and thought, who's to say that being involved in at risk activity is impulse? It can be when you have nothing else to turn to the one day your life goes completely into shambles, so you turn to drugs or alcohol, but usually these things happen over a period of time and that's when it becomes dangerous. Her concept of propaganda though I believe is beneficial to my issue because 1) there isn't enough of it and 2) it's important that there is more advocacy of programs to prevent these issues from continuing to arise. The right form of propaganda is key though, and I think that was another important aspect she touched on. She said that it needs to spread something that will make people believe it is real and happening and could happen to you, it should scare you into doing something about it. That's why Hitler was successful, but how far can it really go?

In regards to the Benhabib reading, I think that we have a very serious problem with the way we view citizenship and applying to undocumented residents. In terms of how this applies to my issue though, I am not really sure how it does other than we can't always accommodate everyone thought they belong to a political community or community in general. Benhabib stated that practices should be non-discriminatory in scope. I diigoed that we can't really just make exceptions for everyone all the time, and unfortunately I believe that's the truth. However when politically speaking, it's especially harsh on my issue because they are children who don't have a right to vote. They definitely can't be accommodated if they don't belong to a "political citizenship" of sorts. It's really hard all the barriers there are between state and nation citizenship but that doesn't really affect my issue either. Over all I don't believe that the people affected by my issue feel represented when it comes to that.

One aspect of this reading that I was particularly interested in was establishing global citizen rights. I think it's necessary because while these things that would be considered rights, are norms in most urban societies. It's really difficult to make them norms in other societies where they don't see it in the same light. At risk activity within you is something that his happening in many countries and I think everyone handles it differetnly. By establishing some sort of norms or rights it'd be easier to manage and help. Other than that I don't really see how this non citizenship and citizenship ideology really applies to my issue because we are dealing with children and whether or not they are legal it's still right to help them.


Read More......
Sunday, March 21, 2010 Posted in | | 0 Comments »

6.

Is the population your are working with in your activism project entitled to "group rights"? If so, what kind of group rights should they have? How does Tully's notion of "modern citizenship" impact the groups you are working with? Negatively or positively? Has there been a convergence in attitudes regarding the population/issue you are working with? Why or why not?


Because most of society associates my population with the minority population then most would say they are entitled to group rights. Given that this population is a minority already I think they are entitled to group rights. These group rights involving mostly the opportunity to be given assistance. Not necessarily "special rights" in a society but more so the ability to have a fair chance at life compared to others. This is also a sticky situation because there is always the opposing saying that "everyone can make it if they try". For some they are stronger at being able to overcome challenges while others accept defeat and turn to other things. There is also another problem with this for me, if they are entitled to these group rights, then does that mean it's the responsibility of the government to take care of them? I assume the answer would be yes. If we are talking about actions like affirmative action and no child left behind then yes it is the government's responsibility. Anything after that though if those aren't working enough is the responsibility of the parents. And then the responsibility of school, also programs set up by non-profits.

In regards to the Tully reading and our discussions in class I think that the notion of modern citizenship, from the way I understand it, negatively impacts the population I am working with.
If we refer to this statement to answer the question: "modern citizens see their modular form of citizenship as universal and superior and all others as particular and inferior, and see themselves as having the imperial right and duty to enter into other societies, free them from their inferior ways, impose the institutional preconditions of modern citizenship, which conveniently brings unconscionable profits to their corporations and unconscionable inequality to the people they are modernizing, and use violence and military rule against those envious ‘anti-moderns’ who resist." Then i feel like we are negatively impacting the population we deal with depending on which culture we are referring to here. If we are referring to the rich then they probably do believe that they are superior to these other cultures and can take advantage of the situation. Usually finding a way to make a profit from entering into these communities. What I have found though is that most of this is not particularly true for youth programs that keep at risk youth and other youth out of trouble. Almost all of it is volunteer, and none of these programs have a large fee that can't be paid. It's really easy to get youth involved in after school activities and it doesn't seem like there is a time where the community feels superior but more feels like they are doing something for a great good. Which as we discussed in class at the very beginning may be a form of feeling superior.

I don't really think there has been a convergence in attitudes in my issue. There is enough about it in mass media to really get out to everyone. It's very hush hush if you will. It's not like homelessness where everyone is aware of it, and never does anything about it, because what can you do, it's such a huge issue? The only convergence I can see is how at risk youth is being dealt with here and how it is also being tackled in other countries, usually dealt the same way, through non-profit and non-governmental programs. While I was in South Africa, I learned a lot about how they deal with youth. In the townships, gangs, drugs, STDs, and alcohol are very easy to get into if the youth aren't kept busy. There are now several non-profits set up in and around Cape Town townships that work to keep these youth out of trouble in townships. I went to the Amy Biehl foundation while i was there to learn about these programs. Amy Biehl was a full bright scholar who died during the apartheid two days before she was supposed to leave South Africa. She was white and headed to a township in the middle of an apartheid protest and because these youth had known nothing but "white are evil" they killed her. Now the foundation works with 8 different schools in the area in after school programs to keep them from "becoming victims of the townships''. Most of these programs are set up by US citizens who fully believe in providing the opportunities necessary to succeed. With this foundation their graduation from high school rate has gone up, and the amount of students going to college, graduating and getting jobs. I think the convergence exists in situations like that.

Read More......
Sunday, March 14, 2010 Posted in | | 1 Comments »

5

Response to previous comment on last weeks blog:

I take back that it's not related to oligarchy. In a sense it is if we think about who has the power to change these situations for these youth. If the power is in the hands of the people with the most money, then clearly they aren't struggling with at risk youth issues. They have enough money to guide their children in the right direction so it's not of their concern, because they don't see this happening in their family.

What type of citizenship do you want to promote through your activities this semester? Is your social activism consistent with a "new right critique"? Do you propose to enhance civic virtue in your activism work? Your service work? What role do rights play in your project? Do they advance or impede your interests?

The type of citizenship I am trying to promote through my activities this semester is getting more people involved in the non-profit agencies that have set up programs for at risk youth. Becoming a mentor for at risk youth isn't always easy. Sometimes there are programs like Big Brothers and Big Sisters that isn't necessarily for at risk youth but preventing youth from at risk activity. There are also places like Casa Pacfica in Camarillo that work with at risk youth specifically and have mentors, tutors, and volunteers of all kinds help with the children. By promoting non-profits like these to society we can get more people to consider the idea of helping change the way these youth are living.

As I discussed in class, I believe that my topic deals with the new right critique of "social rights should be administered by non-political organizations". I don't believe this is true for ALL social rights but in my case this does apply. Our government has already provided funding for school so that way students can learn and stay out of trouble for eight hours a day. I believe it's the responsibility of the parents to find after school programs for their children if they can't go home on their own yet. Or if the parent won't be home to watch them. While there is a critique that the state has an obligation to provide social rights I feel this isn't true in this case either. It isn't necessarily your social right to stay out of trouble but it's your social right to be protected from dangerous activity. But again, this is the responsibility of one's parents and not the state to bring you up in safe conditions. The state can't always control the decisions people make. It's the decisions people make that create environments dangerous for youth to grow up in. And again it's up to the oyuth to make the right decision. WIth programs like Big Brothers and Big Sisters by having that role model figure, making the right decision and learning what the right decision is becomes easier to understand. Going out and facing the world alone isn't always the best thing for everyone. Some would argue that there are plenty of people in this world who have gone out on their own without parents guiding them or anyone and have turned out okay. This is true, but we aren't all the same person. We don't all have the same mindset and courage to know what is right.

I think that the idea in my head enhances civic virtue to some extent. By providing youth guidance we create safer environments in the future. They make better decisions which then leads to future environments being safer and so on and so forth. (This is almost becoming an equation I'm ready to write out, so it makes more sense) Hopefully you understand what I'm saying. guided youth = good decisions = safer environments for the future = less at risk activity being available. While these youth are being helped, we are creating a safe environment for the communities in the future.

Depending on the way we look at rights I guess rights sort of impeded my situation, since I believe it's the job of non-political organizations to help in these matters. It's our "civic duty" to make sure our own children stay safe, but that we look out for the well being of our community as well. If that entails working with other children to make sure they stay safe, then so be it.

Read More......
Sunday, March 7, 2010 Posted in | | 0 Comments »

4 (emailed it to you now posting it)

Ok so as far dates I am currently working it out with a friend and casa Pacifica in Camarillo. We are actually trying to go once a week. Campus activism ideas include...big brothers big sisters coming to campus to get members to join. Working with the psychology department to set up a forum or discussion about at risk youth and how the different volunteer programs set up like big brothers and big sisters help prevent situations like that. Right now I am struggling with finding something that would actually work and get people interested and Interested in the cause. As far as our relation to reading I feel like my topic doesn't necessarily apply to an oligarchical society. I think race has a major factor in my issue because of the stereotypes of people that are involved in substance abuse and violence. Generally people believe that blacks and Mexican are the only groups that experience this association. However what we can find is that this doesn't involve race but more socioeconomic problems. Usually youth whose parents are constantly working to make ends meet tend to fall into at risk activity. When you are young and you don't have proper guidance you tend to follow what others are doing or who will take you in. In all I think that it's important for this to be advocated to students who one day plan to have a family. Also for those who believe this is a potential situation in their family can learn what to do to prevent it. I think it's important more legislation is passed that will enable programs that can prevent this activity.

So the time stamp isn't going to be correct because I had to post it the next morning but it was sent to your inbox last night.

Ashley

Read More......
Monday, March 1, 2010 Posted in | | 1 Comments »