the town that doesn't read

...breeds really myopic people.

i currently live in Fremont, CA. i don't love it. i've only lived here 5.5 months, but as a kid, my family and i would visit our family in the Bay Area and we'd stay at my aunt's house in Fremont. in my encounters and experiences with Fremont denizens, i've come to realize the people here are... how should i put this... not intellectually inclined.

it's a difficult thing to explain, since i risk coming across as mean and supremely judgmental, but here it is anyway: Fremont ("Freak-mont" as my cousin from LA likes to call it) is extremely superficial in a way that ought to put LA to shame (that utterance in itself is pretty damning). while LA proved to be a pleasant blend of Midwestern/East Coast transplants, outdoor enthusiasts, intellectuals, activists and community advocates, the extremely poor and the extremely wealthy, the deluded and the jaded and the absolutely crazy, Fremont is predominantly one type of person: privileged. not only privileged, but delusionally privileged, self-importantly privileged, unmercifully privileged, ignorantly privileged. and if there's one thing i can't stand, it's privilege without any responsibility.

the problem with this kind of community is that privilege, and all the trappings of extravagant wealth, are normalized. everyone works at their tech industry job from 9-7, drives their BMW/Mercedes/Lexus to work out at their designer gyms, has dinner at one of many restaurants in the area, and goes home to their mini-mansions and their loveless sexless family lives with their spouse and 2.5 kids. the kids i've encountered who grow up here are terrifying: pre-teens carry Chanel purses and follow their mommies around at the mall, families have Sunday dinner at a restaurant, everyone staring blankly into the gentle glow of a smart phone or iPad. the children all seemed perfectly primed and ready to take their parents' places as the future CEOs and CFOs of america. i can ask my cousins how much a house or luxury car costs and they'll provide an answer in an instant, and with a little disdain for my ignorance, but when i probe them instead for information on the UC budget crisis, their eyes glaze over like robots that didn't understand the command, then shrug it off like it's not important and thus not worth knowing. for further comparison: a few weeks ago, i rode my bike out to the annual Arts and Culture fair to volunteer with a local environmental advocacy organization. my cousin, on the other hand, spent the day charging visitors to the fair $6 to park their car in the parking lot he co-opted with his friends. his parents openly lauded his entrepreneurial spirit, as they explained to me it's one of his most cherished "traditions." what a good capitalist!

comparing my upbringing with theirs makes me so glad my parents chose to be the "rebels" in the family and raise my brother and i in the midwest, while they both worked for a state university. i grew up reaping the benefits of the state and having a deep respect for public programs and institutions. i grew up valuing education and community service, rather than making money, and that has led me to take my undergraduate research very seriously, led me to teach special ed for two years in an underserved community, get a Master's, and now i plan to further my education and get an MPA from one of the best schools in the country so i can research and implement more progressive policies that protect the environment, reduce wealth disparities, and repair public programs so they better serve their communities. my relatives, on the other hand, balk at the mention of higher ed, none of them having gone past a Bachelor's degree in anything. their favorite way to spend their free time is watching tv, surfing the net, playing computer games, and finding additional ways of making money (day-trading, gambling, buying foreclosed houses and upselling them).

i'm always fascinated at the ways in which we choose lives for ourselves, how we carve our identities with chance and choice. being able to understand the story of your life and how you arrived at your convictions and passions is something i think about often, especially when i'm surrounded by so many people who i feel so different and disconnected from.

and, to tie it all up and to return to the reason i started writing in the first place: the reason i am so unhappy here in Fremont can be summed up in one poignant point: they don't read here. in my entire life, i've never known a public library that only opened one day a week from 10 to 5. that is the library closest to me, and it's holding my requested reading list hostage because i can't find time to go during their hours. the whole library system here is messed up and underfunded, understaffed, and underserving the community, you just need to view their hours to get a sense of how many children in the Silicon Valley area are not getting full access to the free literature they should. even more amazing, is that there are also no bookstores in the area to supplement this lack. i searched all of Fremont and neighboring cities to find a viable bookstore and only found one: a Half Price Books (the rest consisted of an adult bookstore, Islamic bookstore and a Zion Christian bookstore). it saddens me to think the nearest bookstore is a going-out-of-business Borders 24 miles away.

avocado couch

i opened an etsy account the other day, because of recently developed aspirations to start crafting from home instead of working a 9-5 job (this is because, more than likely, i will no longer have my teaching position at school next year due to budget cuts, and due to a lack of interest in devoting myself full-time to graduate school, will most likely be living at home, not “at home” as in with my parents (not that there's anything wrong with that b/c my parents are exceedingly lovely ppl), but in a home, that is, a dwelling-place, or, what i imagine to be just one large room with carpet and a window (because that's all i need), so, anywhere really).

ANYWAY! the etsy shop i opened is called Avocado Couch, and when/if it opens, will probably specialize in random things made of felt, hand-bound books, t-shirts with strange animal pictures on them, stationery, and who knows what else. i think mostly i just want to stay at home (/”inside”) and sit on the carpet, and cut paper with knives and sew things. that would be nice.

this will be my banner!

-stephan!e

---

!edit! i just realized that etsy requires a registration fee, and considering i have no start up money to speak of, no "products" to sell (yet), and no customers (yet! haha, i kid!), it seems unwise to pay a website for services i could more or less undertake myself. so! for now, or, in the future when this finally comes to fruition, i can post things i make on this website you are currently staring at and taking the time to read (thank you!) and i'll include my contact info and we can hassle each other over prices and all that performative business-talking bullcrap on the phone or via email. really, it would just be so wonderful to have little creations of mine wandering around out there. that's what i'm really in it for, not the money, or the fame, i just want to make things. livin' the dream y'all!

the trouble with Tiger Woods

i read this really great article today, about Tiger Woods and his recent "fall from grace" (the only article about Tiger's recent media scandal i could bear to read. i can't stand watching the media pick apart celebrities like that, when they're obviously having some serious family/marital issues). [i find the more i try to read about grad programs in education and the more i try to write something related to a personal statement, the more news i end up reading, and the more blog posts i end up writing. at least i'm being productive in some way?]

i was working online when the Tiger story first broke, and was ostensibly mistaken in thinking it would subside quickly. since that Thanksgiving weekend, the story has been a topic of almost daily discussion in entertainment/celebrity news circles and manages to leak into the periphery whenever i venture online.

but this article i read today takes a much-needed critical stance on Tiger's problems that has been completely ignored and excluded in the majority all of recent corporate media coverage. [it is interesting to note that the article i read incidentally comes from a grassroots, socialist-leaning, online media co-op. coincidence?] the article discusses Tiger's loss in corporate sponsorship as a result of his negative media attention and the pulling of Tiger spots and commercials, even the halt of his own Gatorade drink, "Tiger Focus." of course, it came as no surprise that Tiger's irresponsible conduct would result in huge blows to his public image and career – the almost total loss of his billion-dollar sponsorships, the subsequent self-imposed exile from golf and life, the increasing amount of tarnish on a once veneered and venerable public image – but, what this article brings up that others have forgotten in the sizzle and scandal, is that Tiger's had it coming for a while, and not just in the sense that he's received his comeuppance for marital infidelity, i mean a practiced neglect for social responsibility in his career actions.

unbeknownst to me prior to the recent media attn, Tiger's had some pretty nasty corporate bed fellows, including Chevron and Nike (who, touchingly, bucked the trend of dropping him, choosing instead to stand by their cash cow, citing his tenure on their payroll and his proven athleticism). Nike, Tiger's sponsor for ten years and counting, is also, let's not forget, well known for their use of sweat shops. so Nike's loyalty is perhaps not undeserved: Tiger, in his ten years under their sponsorship, has never once spoken against or implored them to pursue different labor practices. and this, it seems, is only the tip of the iceberg. Tiger has been linked to selling his celebrity super power of distraction to aid the efforts of developers and military in ousting Filipino peasants from their land, in the name of bringing golf and golf courses to the Philippines.

as this article makes clear, Tiger's conduct has deserved scrutiny for quite some time, albeit for different reasons than what warranted his current media spanking. while the world continues to lament Tiger's tarnished public image, it is necessary that we pry a little beyond merely the celebrity tabloid fodder and get at the real reason for Tiger's declining success (considering his involvement with some questionably irresponsible corporations and businesses, is it any surprise that at the first sign of trouble, they decided to jump ship? corporations do not usually specialize in solidarity or compassion, maybe Tiger would have learned that if he'd checked up on some things).

accepting things for how they are and focusing on just how one benefits from the system is to live in denial that the system eventually comes back to screw you over.

-stephan!e

a beginner's guide to domination and suppression

how to kill activism, reassert the market's dominance of everyday life, and ruin democracy:

1) authority + passivity

(teach 'em not to think for themselves)

2) empty promises

(keep em running. employ 'carrot and stick')

3) divide & conquer

(kill their communities, take away their friends - better yet, have them do it to themselves)

4) the illusion of choice

(make them think they want/need these things and that they're being taken care of)

you'll have a totalitarian state in no time!

(disclaimer: i, of course, don't agree with any of these things. it was just that while i was writing my thesis today i made a list like this to clarify the points i was going to be making in this particular section of my paper and i thought it was interesting enough to share.)

p.s. it should be noted that all these were, and are, being practiced everyday, in the media industry, and especially the school.

racing to the finish line

ok, so calm down...

i'm doing better now. i just had to freak out a bit and get it out of my system. i now have 26 (up from 20) solid (as opposed to lumpy) pages of extremely well-researched critique of free market capitalism (yipee!) and ideas for another 5 pages (at least) of more.

and the delightful thing is that i'm really enjoying putting these various theorists in conversation with each other (Adam Smith, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Aristotle, John Dewey, Horace Mann, and a few radical voices thrown in for fun's sake). the use of Smith's own words to tear apart free market capitalist individualism is particularly exciting, in my opinion.

from here, i move on to a discussion of civic virtue, the role of schooling in developing a civic tradition, and then a critique of the Restoration policies of the 1970s and '80s. then a discussion of the culture of schooling, a rant against grades and incentivized education, and then some discussion of student movements and protest culture (if i have time...)

racing to the finish line (my deadline is April 1st!!!)

-stef

Colin Powell at Miami University and the culture of materialism

from a pro-peace/ending the occupation in Iraq listserv:

"Colin Powell's second visit to Miami University, bookending the Bush administration, brought to us a message that recalls Indiana Jones: Fortune and Glory.

Though Powell's speech laid out a sports metaphor that on its surface seemed positive, underlying the entire talk was a pervasive message that money rules. By means of setting up an introduction of 9.11, Powell spoke of a materialism, vanity and power. He told the story of how upon retiring, for the second time, he didn't know what to do with himself so he bought a car. This was met with much laughter from the audience. He then told us about how he was considered by Time magazine to be aging gracefully--more laughter. Lastly, he said that when asked what he misses most about being Secretary of State he answers--"My own plane."

This story was filled with kings, dignitaries, red carpets, bands playing for him, "adoring crowds," and so on. These three stories seemed to me to be the most powerful of the night. They were distractions from real issues that he could have addressed while at the same time established the importance of money--buying cars, having planes--and looking good. Fortune and Glory. I imagine some might object to my criticism that Powell was being funny, entertaining, but I think such criticism only makes the point stronger. He distracted people from real stories about what it's like to be a General or Secretary of State, the difficulties, the rewards, the work, the decisions, and narrowed all of his experience down to possessions--the things he got out of it.

Later, when Powell outlined the four major issues he sees the US facing, I could not help remembering the earlier stories. So, when he said that government left us--his "young friends"--with some positives, that countries are on playing fields rather than battlefields, he was less than inspiring. The four games being played, according to Powell are 1) economics--we need to strengthen the economy to bring people out of poverty; 2) energy--we need energy to build up economics; 3) environment--careful use of the energy needed to build the economy; 3) education--better k-12 education in order to build the economy. Why aren't those things exciting? Because they're burdened with greed. Those stories about corvettes, Time and airplanes defined Powell's issues. Everything was about what you can get. He ended his speech by telling a story about how he gets free hot dogs from foreigners. It could have made you cry to hear him tell of the sheer pleasure these foreign hot dog vendors get from simply being in America. And Powell, who was paid how much to speak to his young friends, doesn't give up six bucks to help this person? His speech, however, let's us leave feeling that we too can achieve like he did, we can get things, but mostly we should be happy to be Americans."

- Aaren Yandrich

oh YUCK. now i am extremely glad i didn't go to see this Tuesday night. i had made up my mind to go and help my friends protest against the war, was gonna walk across the bitter desolate expanse that is the frozen landscape of the Miami campus to go sit in a stadium full of self-entitled yuppie brats and listen to this jingoist garbage??! thank god insane sinus pressure and debilitating nausea intervened!

i think my pure unadulterated hatred for American jingoism and its close cousin rabid consumerism would have exploded my head and splattered my mucus membranes all over Colin Powell's face. so much for glory, eh?

seriously tho, to hear that he came to Miami to give a speech about the beauty of American capitalism, to urge the (already) materialistic Miami student populace to join him in drooling over and jacking off to the ideas of fast cars, oil, money, youth, power, and fame without shame or conscience, makes me wish i hadn't been too sick that night to go over there and punch him in the neck and groin. what kind of message is he sending to our college students if the only thing he urges them to aspire to is the accumulation of ever more material wealth and wasted potential?

oh, it just makes me so angry. this is exactly the kind of perverted political philosophy i am putting to shame in my senior thesis, but what good is it if the leaders of our nation - and the future leaders, too - are too busy gawking at themselves in mirrors to see that everything is completely fucked?

an image capture from American Psycho - a satire deriding the American corporatism and materialism of the 80s, a fitting analogy that was just too easy to pass up.

Colin Powell and his ethos of Fortune and Glory are a disease and a cancer, and he's only bound to flip that Corvette and pin himself under it.

-stephanie

keep on keeping on...

the media urges workers to cease their striking "for the sake of the children!" read on...

busy with finals and wrapping up business from the past semester and from the summer too. i just wanna make it thru the weekend, when most of my work will hopefully be done, and then enjoy hanging out without something hanging over my head.

so, for now, read (if you want) a paper i submitted in the past week on the state of labor relations in America today, and an indictment on Christmas.

-stef

------
The Villainization of the Worker and the Cultural Power of Christmas

When I first read the BBC’s article “Show goes on for Grinch musical” (November 22, 2007), I was reminded of the movie Love, Actually (2003). The film, in case you haven’t seen it, is an examination of eight London couples’ relationships during the holiday season. In it, improbable romances take bloom “because it’s Christmas” (offered to the audience as an excuse, or a rationalization – as if to aid in the suspension of disbelief). The final message isn’t so much that “Love conquers all,” but rather that there’s only one thing more powerful and irrational than Love: Christmas.
The recent halt to the stagehand strike on Broadway reminds me of this tendency in our movies – aptly depicted in Love, Actually – and in our culture to mythologize and bestow power to certain symbols. I mention Love, Actually because of the important link between spectacle, commodity and culture that it makes explicit: the film fetishizes love and the spirit of the holiday season, succeeding in having the audience and its characters surrender themselves to the power of Love and Christmas, depicted as a set of performances and exchanges of codified behaviors. The commodity and its spectacle are conflated: Love is Christmas and happy endings. In a society whose culture is largely mediated, cultural values are often articulated and reproduced in the form of spectacle: “The spectacle is not a collection of images; rather, it is a social relationship between people that is mediated by images.” And Christmas is Capitalism at its most spectacular: the pageantry, the parades, the commercials, the camped-out shoppers waiting as if for a new Star Wars film, whole city landscapes turned into Winter Wonderlands. Citizens turned into mall zombies, as in George A. Romero’s Dawn of the Dead (1978). These holidays are a holy daze.
This spectacularization becomes problematic because of its tendency to distract us from problems of lived existence. It is the tendency of the spectacle to replace reality with that of a hyperreality – “a world in which the spectacle defines, circumscribes, and becomes more real than reality itself.”
This is capitalism in action, enacted as spectacle, an illusion we uphold and defend at the expense of our fellow human beings. “The spectacle makes visible the world of the commodity dominating all that is lived.” This can be seen in the New York State Supreme Court judge’s injunction against the striking stagehands, demanding a resumption of their work “for the sake of this city.” The invisible force of labor in society suddenly made visible, it is imperative to the machine of Capitalism that labor protests be quelled as soon as possible, so that “life as usual” may resume. The article also mentions the popularity of Broadway among tourists, suggesting the need to end the stagehand strike in order to give them what they came for – an “authentic” NYC experience. The show must go on. Resume your positions. = The institution of Christmas exercising its domination by subjugating all other activities to its demands.
Within this dichotomy, the worker and his/her rebellion are situated in a position of delinquency, aberration, and worse – villainy. Anyone resisting or delaying the magic of Christmas is derogated – a “Grinch.” The story of “How the Grinch Stole Christmas” exemplifies this mythology, telling of a bitter curmudgeon who experiences a “change in heart” due to the overwhelming spirit of Christmas. By withholding the popular Christmas show, the striking workers are depicted in a negative light, as challenging the very sanctity of Christmas itself. One of the article’s captions explains, “the musical is very popular with children,” the implication being that the workers are victimizing an innocent public by disrupting the holiday proceedings. “Do it for the children,” we say. Do it “for the sake of the city!”
This is an appeal to Christmas spirit: it’s a long-standing myth in American culture that Christmas is “the most wonderful time of the year,” a time for philanthropy, for goodwill towards all, and for outstanding miracles. The stagehand strike went against the imagery of jubilation and goodwill associated with the holiday season, but Christmas soon conquered and quashed its opposition. “The spectacle is the moment when the commodity has attained the total occupation of social life.” The BBC’s article depicts the labor strike as a deviation from shared cultural values and reasserts the language of Christmas cultural mythology, calling the continuation of work a “miracle on 44th street.” The myth of Christmas spirit manifests itself in this particular instance to bedazzle us and quell opposition to a general capitalist mentality. We, the readers, become accomplices in suppressing the rebellion of the workers, we defend the spectacle at all costs, complaining about TV show reruns or a Broadway-less visit to NYC, rather than caring about the actual workers themselves or taking the time to understand the issues for which they are striking. The spectacle of Christmas becomes more real to us than the reality of labor disputes and workplace inequities.
This illustrates the power of the spectacle over our lived experiences, the entrancing nature of spectacle to deceive and distract. Submitting to the power of Christmas and its spectacle turns this moment of rebellion and critique into one of irreverence and then irrelevance.

Works Cited:
Society of the Spectacle by Guy Debord
Simulacra and Simulation by Jean Baudrillard

capitalism

storing this image for future use in my thesis, particularly for side-to-side comparison with a visual representation of the traditional educational system and its business.

dangerous familiars

hi to all you patient and adoring darlings!

thanks for your patience these past few days. i've been busy traveling all over West Virginia and Kentucky, and have just recently returned to being settled and having all my things in one small room again.

that is, i'm back at Miami University for one final year. and as i'm shopping around for the most interesting and compelling classes to take, while i'm stressing out about my undergraduate thesis and studying for the GRE's and planning student actions for all my various activisms, i've also found, in the blissful off-time, a surprising nostalgia and reminiscence creeping over me.

even as i look around the campus, at the frightening droves of willowy blondes and preppy jock boys, their polished exteriors enough to make me insecure, and despite the inexplicable phenomenon of cornhole that seems to proliferate here, i can sense that i'm really going to miss this place next fall, when i will surely/hopefully be somewhere far, far away.

i know it's merely because i've gotten familiar with the place, have become accustomed to moving back to the same dorm for the past 4 years, am grateful to see the same familiar faces, to have such a strong community in which to wallow, enjoy coming back each year geared up and ready to fight for a cause i've been devoted to for over 5 semesters.

but...

this familiarity has me kinda scared too. comfort is overrated, even dangerous. keeping on your toes becomes kinda like floating, when you get good at it. and who doesn't want to defy gravity?

i got to thinking about this in one of my classes today. i was sitting in a class full of Education majors, a class called "Cultural Studies, Power, and Education," a class filled with typical Miami-types, feeling a little on edge because everyone in there was so white bread [sic]. the professor had been trying all of class to ease us into a radical mindset (which i gratefully dived right into), while we examined ads from the 90's that proffered 40's gender politics to preschool aged consumers. i glanced around the room to see students rolling their eyes, grimacing at the mention of atheism and Marxism, the girl beside me scrawling the word SOCIALIST in big letters across the first blank page of her notebook, and underlining it.

i give the professor a lot of credit. to open with that kind of radical leap in student expectation is truly courageous. i'm counting on a smaller class next time around.

anyway, this moment turned into a huge realization for my research into the practice of critical pedagogy:
for me (and i consider myself fairly radical, surprise, surprise), this first class wasn't unusual or myth-busting at all. in fact, it was too easy to agree with the professor, too natural to nod along, to laugh at his leftist jokes, to feel grateful for and, yes, comfortable with a liberal bias in the classroom.
on the other hand, my peers were noticeably unnerved, even perturbed, by the professor and what they must have perceived to be Commie rantings. and so, they were reluctant to engage, hesitant to open their minds to the possibility that advertisers care less about the consumer than about selling products.

and then i realized, looking around, everyone in this class was wearing nice Polo Ralph Lauren polo shirts, J Crew khakis, their heads gelled and kempt, glistening examples of Miami's "squarely in the box" reputation. of course they couldn't open their minds to cultural studies and critical pedagogy! it made them uncomfortable!

when capitalism is working for you, when you're comfortable with it, you see no need, no reason, to challenge it. comfort and capitalism are closely related, in fact, they are co-conspirators. in a society used to instant gratification, it becomes hard to get people used to stepping out of their comfort zones. why would they ever have to, if they can find a KFC wherever they go? same goes for ideological comfort zones.

existential discomfort = the worst kind.

thots!
-stef

---
speaking of familiars, you should get familiar with the guys over at Said the Gramophone. they keep one of the most beautifully written music blogs out there. in fact, it's one of only 2 i actually read on a regular basis. this post was particularly striking and appropriate for the approaching end of summer. FUN TIMES FOREVER.

re-presenting radical student politix

i've been playing with the idea of "re-presentation" [sic]

that is, to represent some things via media is quite different from the things themselves, and so, re-presented. and so, reimagined. the representation is itself a new thing.

this came out of an earlier idea to collaboratively write a book. tho now i am thinking that rather than getting submissions and compiling the disparate pieces, a group of us (student activists) could conduct the writing as an action in itself. we "speak" (rather than write) the book.

so check this out:

a book.
(books are symbols of power, crystallized knowledge, authority. how to remove the weight of the text? (or, how to co-opt it?))

self-published by SFS
(1. challenges the top-down structure of the media industry that mirrors the hierarchies of knowledge found in the educational system. 2. challenges notion of author/reader, performer/audience, producer/consumer. 3. active, rather than passive, participation in the generation of media, dissemination of knowledge)

containing conversations
(VOICE! one thing i've noticed in my study of critical pedagogy is the concentration on theory and lack of PRACTICE. education is fundamentally social. education for the betterment of our society and its citizens - what could be more social?)

about our activism
("our." "we" "us" "you" "me". first person plural. positions my self, our selves IN the discourse. there's no distance between me (the author) and you (the reader). i am part of the problem and solution, just as you are. draws reader in...)

there are so many books out there written about student activism and disengagement of our youth, but they're all by academics and theorists, not by actual students themselves.

furthermore, participatory media builds community and can empower students with a feeling of agency if they are involved in the process.

i dunno, but i'm thinking this could become a pretty cool creative project portion of my thesis...
-stephan!e

is bono trying to tell us something??!?

so my social entrepreneurship class is working with mrs. bono (as in, the wife of irish "rockstar"/u2 frontman bono) to promote and expand their existing "socially conscious" clothing line, EDUN.

EDUN aims to help the people of lesotho, africa (yes, the lesotho of recent diamond fame) by creating living wage jobs in the garment industry. every process in the production of the clothes for EDUN are done by african laborers (for a living wage) and then shipped back here for sale in the US (at a hefty price of upwards from $45 for a t-shirt).

i only have a few qualms about this:

first, at $45+ for a t-shirt, even if it is made by a well-fed african laborer, do they think their business is going to make enough sales to dramatically impact the lives of all the workers? and how many workers are actually working at these factories? enough to change life in lesotho for everyone? and what about the rest of africa?

even though EDUN aspires to help the citizens of lesotho, africa by creating living wage jobs in the manufacturing of factory-made t-shirts, i don't necessarily think industrialization is appropriate for sustainable growth. this may help the few ppl actually working the jobs, and maybe their families, but what are the odds this will actually help their place in the global economy?

also, industrialization has a history of destroying cultures and communities in the name of economic growth.

further, having workers in africa make t-shirts for sale in the US requires shipment of supplies and products across seas, and takes away from the possibility of growing local business. products made are shipped out, with no immediate local impact, besides the fact of the wages themselves, which, though they are living wages, still doesn't take away from the fact that they are wages in the place of one's labor.

even though lesotho citizens are getting living wages at these jobs, the fact is that they are still working to produce objects of consumption, products which they don't themselves consume. as any marx scholar would be able to tell you, this is alienation as a result of the capitalist system at its best. and speaking of capitalism...

rather then helping to eliminate the source of the problem (: CAPITALISM), this model perpetuates the very source of strife in our modern world. think about it: if capitalism didn't exist, everything we did would not revolve around this abstract and arbitrary numerical monetary value we place on it, but would only depend on its use value. thus, the things we produce wouldn't be cheap in quality because that makes it cheaper to produce, and things would last longer, and would be of more use to us as people.

AND, rather than have our lives consumed by the act of consumption, we could live to produce meaningful labor. that is, rather than working to earn the money we need to buy the products of someone else's reluctant labor, we could work together to produce things of value to us, rather than laboring and spending our energies on empty $'s.

thus, materialism is not the way. and capitalism only serves to maintain the status quo and continue to imprison our fellow human beings. for, as long as capitalism exists along with a system of production and consumption, we remain slaves to the $, limited in our potential by the hope of material advancement.

and of course, as long as capitalism exists, the lower working classes will always exist to make the upper elite feel special. and that goes against the very idea of democracy.


and finally:
EDUN = NUDE backwards.

LIVE = EVIL.

EDUN LIVE = EVIL NUDE.


but don't get me wrong. i mean, i think bono's idea is great. and though a little flawed, it's at least a step in the right direction. but what we really need, i mean really REALLY need, is systemic change.

and the annihalation of capitalism. :-)

but hey, it's a start.

groveling before the shrine of bono,
stephanie

p.s. i stayed up all night for the second night in a row working on a paper for this class.
and i feel like my spine is melting.

i dislike business class. it makes my heart stop beating.