Yes Men, Resistance is Possible!

We got to see a part of The Yes Men movie, as part of our class instruction. Looking at Hardt & Negri’s Empire, in addition to having studied a lot of Foucault the semester before, made me feel almost hopeless. Deconstruction requires a regrouping of ideas at the end, but I kept waiting hopeful of a possible response, an equal and opposite reaction. It came in the shape of the movie, The Yes Men.

Through their exaggeration of the corporation and the impersonation of key individuals within these entities, The Yes Men provide an alternative to the corporate situations and problems in the world. They provide key responses, that although untrue, tend to shake the reality and bring forth a more humane side of life in a complex world. Not only do they inform and provide an appreciation for what should have been a more valuable, expected solution, but they also contribute to the drowning of the corporation as we know it.

Is resistance possible in a world of imperialism and imperial rule by the corporation? It certainly is possible, as long as we actively participate in the process of responding, addressing, presenting what solutions we would like to see met (think of social responsibility); and certainly by providing alternatives rather than constantly seeking to reactively address situations that were already created. The solution may have to be instead constructed as an alternative, not an opposing movement. Social responsibility was born out of a desire to please consumers who seemed to be moved by the social action and interest in the community; therefore, companies do listen to the voices of their consumers. Unity and agreement between the fragmented pieces of society are necessary for this to operate successfully, but if you’re still wondering… yes men: resistance is possible!

Other-ness defined

What does the other stand for? I often find myself oscillating between meanings for the word. Other refers to a distinct self, often carries a derogative meaning, and often becoming a referent to the distanced subject. Who is other? That other car would easily be taken to define a car that is different than the one I am referring to. That other girl could be deemed to allude to another girl; however, historically the epistemological construct of the word is far more complex than the word itself. Meanings are constructed and developed over time, and the historical context plays a crucial role in the epistemological (socially constructed meaning) creation of the word.

What is otherness to hybridity and cultural communication? Otherness stands for the other excluded or excluding; the one who is different than the us group. The term gives more meaning and relevance to the idea of us and them, which further fuels disagreement and discordance among the various nations and cultures. Traditionally, the otherness was born out of the colonization of various nations and was perpetuated by the racial discrimination that dominated the historical context of almost all nations. Winston Churchill stated that “history is written by the winners, and I [he] intend to write it”. The more developed nations have systematically taken over the world and established a strong notion of otherness, to block the others (or people deemed to be less developed) from attaining more unity and power in their fight for liberation.

To me otherness is the process of objectifying an equally capable individual in order to cut their ardour to succeed, to rise up and fly: it’s a process of cutting off the wings of a bird ready to fly freely and on its own. Being placed in both us and them situations through international programs, I became more aware of the need to shift such thinking. It is, sometimes, a lack of awareness of the “other” and a fear of an unknown group that lead to a labelling, which is deemed to counteract these fears. However, in the neoliberal discourses we see more of a move towards a masked other and an overly promoted togetherness, “us”. Is this truly the all encompassing revolutionary move, or merely a symptom of the empire at work?

Generation Globalization

After watching this clip, I was immediately reminded of several course themes, namely; globalization, commodification, tourism, and technological frustrations.

This animation was inspired by the artist’s backpacking trip to Asia and his experiences surrounding it. The animation is RIFE with Westernized imagery and ideals and therefore speaks to the frivolous nature of the Western tourist. The main character is the archetypal alpha-male: built with muscles, flowing blonde hair, and technology in tow in order to manage the risks of the “other” as effectively as possible. He arrives in a Desert where no risks are inherently present and yet still relies upon the commodities brought from the west in order to survive this ordeal. This speaks quite nicely to the notion of a globalized world; If the rest of the world is reliant on our technologies, commodities, tools, and ideas because those are what are pushed into nations…without those “things” the rest of the world would be seen as barren, deserted, sparse.

So perhaps this clip is a social commentary on the ways in which American tourists find necessity in managing risks effectively when visiting foreign places. Perhaps, also, it is a testament to the vanity and individualistic aspects of American society. Maybe this clip is trying to say that Americans NEED everything in order to survive, and Non-Westerners do not have the mentality of needing commodities in order to (literally and figuratively) survive. The character takes out a hair dryer; thereby showing the Westernized notion of optimizing the self and constantly needing to perfect ourselves. He also shows a frustration with his technological apparatus by throwing it on the floor in disgust; this completely demonstrates Barney’s notion of technological frustration where we are angry when technology does not work fast enough or well enough. He also shows a reliance on texts in order to survive by reading “traveling for dummies.” Is this to say that we are self-proclaimed “dummies” and thereby lack the mental capacity to travel without a companion book?

Perhaps the most interesting part of this animation however, is the characters need to feel “at home” by immediately reaching for his teddy bear after reading the dangers of travel. This is quite reminiscent of the desire of diasporic groups to remain connected with feelings of “home” and certainly reminds me of Morley’s writings regarding these feelings. Toward the end of the clip, the character becomes so dependent on “stuff” that it ultimately (potentially) destroys him. Could this not be reminiscent of our constant need to better ourselves technologically? Once we have an Ipod, we need the new one, then the newest one, then the unreleased one. When does it stop? Will it ever stop?

Feeling a little Facebook Depressed?

Throughout the term, there have been many convincing arguments about the possibility for an online community. Considering the effects that Facebook can have on those who immerse themselves in the site, provides a new way of understanding how Facebook can indeed be a community.

Up until a couple of weeks ago, I thought that I had become aware of every online risk that existed; there’s internet addiction, cyberbullying , “sexting,” etc. However, a new risk has emerged in light of the advent of social media called “Facebook depression.”

When “Facebook depression” was first brought to my attention I immediately laughed in disbelief and figured it was an exaggerated story. Although many of you may have similar thoughts, I want you to think back to all the Friday nights you stayed at home preparing for presentations or writing essays. When you finally decide to take a break, you go on Facebook and notice that most of your friends are on vacation or have gone out for the night. I think it’s fair to say that these moments have been a little depressing.

According to a recent article in the Globe and Mail, looking at your friends Facebook status updates and photos of people having a great time while out with their friends can have a serious impact on one’s self esteem. They compared this feeling to sitting alone in a crowded cafeteria at school and other real-life encounters that could also lower self esteem.

When considering these comparisons, I couldn’t help but wonder about the notion of community and asked myself: If the effects are the same in ones community than they are on Facebook, is this another example that points to Facebook being a legitimate community? Regardless, Facebook has very real consequences and many of these mirror those that exist in a real community, where there is no “vanishing table.”

If kids are now turning to social media to interact with their friends as opposed to going to the movies or the mall, if people are learning about who they are and who their friends are through Facebook, building relationships and experiencing some of the very same hardships they would in an ordinary community, who is Barney to say that these sites are not real communities?

Seemed Appropriate at the End of Term.

This blog post, though admittedly not as academic as perhaps it should be, is a testament to the real community we have created not only in this course but in this program. This program forced us to think self-reflexively, at times extremely critically, and most of all has created a community of not only academically inclined women, but also a group of close friends.

Speaking personally, I’ve had my fair share of hardships this academic year. I have felt such hardship that I often doubted if I would be able to complete the program. But regardless of personal struggle, I always had a group of girls I could connect with either in the virtual community of Facebook, Text Messaging, Phone Calls, or even this blog. Regardless of the medium in which I could communicate with them through, it would be the same sound advice, the same questions, the same constant reassurance. I think perhaps this is why I so strongly disagree with Darin Barney’s notion that a community must be experienced offline…because my closest communities are not offline, but online.

The friends who have graduated and moved around the world, I can still come to for advice every time I need to just as I did when I would sulk into their dorm room or appear at their door with a tub of ice cream. If it has the ability to unite, inspire, reassure, make comfortable, and make bearable, online or offline makes no real difference. The simple important facet of a community is that you feel as though you are included and comfortable, and to speak quite personally and frank I feel so incredibly welcome when I log onto Facebook and see a whole list of my friends online who I know are there to support me regardless of content: whether it’s a question about marking, assignments, boys, school, life, whatever….the real potential of a community is that it inspires common pride… and I take pride in knowing my friendships are ubiquitous. So thank you girls for a wonderful year : )

And yes. This was my sappy post of the year.

A Marxian View of Globalization

When thinking of globalization, we are generally faced with the challenge of seeing the economical, social, geographical unification of the globe, without looking at the strictly economical context in which globalization was born. Historically the royals of the various powers on the European continent sought to establish their presence on the globe and sought to conquer in order to expand their territories of influence. In so doing they contributed to a fragmentation of the world into spheres of influence, which have remained in reality purely economical.

According to Karl Marx globalization is a result of an economical expansion, “the need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the burgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, establish connections everywhere. … It has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old, established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilized nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw materials, but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of the globe.” Dominating the periphery leads to an increased production of goods that are furthering the economic goals of the colonizers, and the expansion is part of the heavily debated Empire of Hardt and Negri, who argue that power has been fragmented into so many parts, leading to an inability to name its source.

The neoliberal global mentality, seeking to integrate various cultures and cultural backgrounds seems to almost represent a forced inclusion focusing mainly on increased profits; therefore, explaining the continued hybridity and relevance of the us and them differentiations. Think about it… in being environmentally united, are we, as many developing nations protested, engaging in the oppression of the other, since change is more difficultly enforced in the West? It makes me wonder about the veracity of the global integration of various cultures. I am an idealist, but the more I think of globalization, the more I see the developing world remaining in the developing stages.

Promoters, Vehicles, Enforcers… of what exactly?

As it appears, but is often forgotten, the diasporic movement provides an array of advantages for the home country. While one may be quick to judge this as a process that deprives the country of migration from the benefits of the individual engagement within the particular culture, it contributes to the development of the country of origin. So, if there is such a degree of closeness and connectedness within our global society, our global village, why are we so disturbed when others within the same world, but in more impoverished areas are gaining? Or is our love relationship supposed to function only one way … North America and the West receive, and the rest of the world sweats through the process of showing its love? Have we become so caught in the capitalist ideal, have we become so absorbed by the protectionist policies that we are propagating them in an age in which we are presumably living in a free market global economy? Are we the new Me Inc. that contribute to the implementation of national and corporate ideals, thus enforcing the mechanisms of power, control, and hierarchy in the world?

Behind the all inclusive, “we are one world,” lie larger issues of concern. The one world we are living in is not merely a question of unity. If we were to live in a world where we truly cared for our neighbours to the fullness of the principle of caring, we would think twice before becoming tools of the capitalist system. How often have you thought with a form of bitterness and frustration about the outsourcing of jobs to China or India? How often did you feel migrants and immigrants could have been the source of all problems? How often did you feel your country, your people, your community were suffering because of the flux of money and goods to other areas? I assume at one point in time at least one of these questions crossed your mind. But, have you ever considered the fact that you may have become a marionette of the mechanisms of power within neoliberalism, capitalism and global culture?

Think twice next time you look with bitterness to those who are mere passengers in your world, in your country, in your community. While many may be sending money home, or may be choosing not to integrate, this is in part because of the same discourses we often propagate, the politics we adopt – often unconsciously. If we are to live in a united world, the success of another should not be seen as a failure or reason for envy, but much rather, we should respect and learn from those who have succeeded. We live in a world in which we are constantly told we are not good enough and that we need to perfect ourselves: how about appreciating who we are and what we have? How about giving the Cesar what is Cesar’s and moving on with our respective paths? It is time for the world politicians to leave their desire to control aside, if they are truly seeking to promote a united front. Surely, the tensions in the Middle East affect you and me and everyone else; similarly, the North American goals and targets affect you and me and the whole world. If we are all together, then we all suffer with the failure of the "other, or rejoice at the success of the other. Think twice next time you jump to conclusions because much of our selfishness and desire to protect money that is not ours and is found in abundance here, may be the money that provides the development and much needed help in another nation.

Bridging the Digital Divide – The Politics of an Integrated Difference, or the Mere Loss of Identity?

The Internet provides, according to Nakamura’s analysis in Where Do You Want to Go Today?, an opportunity to escape the world of difference and diversity. Does the internet create the opportunity to transcend space, or merely an illusion? Although it may appear that the geographic divide can be bridged by ICTs the reality is quite different. The false premise of the liberation brought forth by technology is often taken to be a truth. Can the defining characteristics of an individual be entirely removed from the online discourses? Most certainly not. In my opinion, carrying out an online discussion in lieu of a live one, would be similar to the exercise of tasting something blind folded, but the specifically constructed tastes or gender characteristics would still exist and be recognizable.

It is assumed that all are the same on the Internet, but are they?! Language and expression became indicative of one’s individuality in the absence of the physical traits. But, do people wish to be melted into a pool of identical cerebellums? While it may provide an opportunity to unite and assimilate all, the Internet almost seems to provide an escape from the actual understanding of the real interaction with cultural diversity, providing the escape exit from reality while also complexly addressing issues relevant to reality. While there seemed to be no distinction, no identity, online individuals sought to differentiate themselves from others through language use and group memberships. 

Categories were made not to count, but it is the same categories that formerly challenged and lead to the improvement of the democratic ideal through their ability to challenge, disrupt and disturb the status quo; without them, many advancements and understandings would never have happened. Was there a sense in the promotion of the apparent diversity, while seeking to mask and create a collective?  Or has this occurred merely in an attempt to integrate the people into a system of power that is more manageable for the political and economical powers? The new form of categorization provides tools for strategic marketing, permitting for the  direct reach of the customers sought and the successful spread of capitalism.

The Internet provides the right tools to bridge the illusory divide, but in reality creates an assimilation of the difference that persists within the parts but is complexly integrated into the whole and ignored altogether.