Structured Response #9- Hanna

Before Twitter had really taken off, the media and television shows kept mentioning it. They would refer to Twitter as if it was something that everyone was already on, which then forced us to ask our self ,"Are we out of the loop?"
I've always wondered why our media forced Twitter on us in this way.

This raises the question for me as to which is right: Did Social Media make a big of an impact on the Arab Spring? or Do we give Social Media sites too much credit?

I'll be the first person to say that I love Social Media. I believe very strongly that Social Media is a powerful globalizing force. It brings people across the world together and connects people in urban areas that would not meet otherwise. It connects us with professionals and amateurs seeking guidance. It does plenty of good in our modern world.

However, I do believe that it has been given far too much credit for the Arab Revolts. The temperature was right for revolution and it would have occurred with or without Social Media. Social Media was simply one of many mobilizing forces. It helped to organize meet up point and to publicize the revolution, but further than that it did not do more than sparking an interest among the population that it was concerned with.

Structured Response 6

            Social media is an increasingly popular way of spreading news. In the 2011 revolts, social media was used as a medium of spreading images, slogans, and events that had to do with the revolution. People were weakly tied to each other through social media because they all believed in a bigger purpose – democracy.

            However, people who call the Arab revolts of 2011 the “Twitter Revolution” seem to not have a grasp of the larger scale of the revolution. Rather, I believe that social media such as Facebook and Twitter were mediums that allowed social movements to take place, but were not the reasons themselves for the social movements. Though peoples weak ties to each other over social media sources certainly sped up the revolution process, these people were not the reason that revolution began in the first place. I think that the catalyst for revolutions, even in the Arab revolts, began with grass roots non-governmental organizations that worked towards the goal of democratization for years before the revolts actually occurred.

            Furthermore, I think that social media was not a factor necessary for revolution. Rather, I think that it helped to speed up the process of the revolts because of its widespread accessibility and its ability to spread news on a minute-to-minute basis. In this way, governments were unable to react as strongly or effectively as they could have because they were essentially taken by surprise. If social media had not been utilized as a method of spreading the word regarding specific protests, these protests would have taken more time to develop and may have been squashed by the governments. Even so, I still maintain that these revolts would have happened with or without social media, even if they had occurred more gradually if social media had not been a medium for communication among citizens. 

Reflection #9- Hanna

In my world politics class, many of the articles that we are reading are mentioning the belief that empowering women is the key to development. I agree with this. As a woman, I can say that there is an understanding that women are the key to furthering this world. It is something that I think that everyone knows without having to read any world politics article.
From here I wanted to shift to the western misunderstanding that the Chadri prohibits women empowerment. This is false.
The Chadri only has as much power as it is given.
Of course, if a woman is forced to wear this and does not want to then this is prohibiting her quest to further the woman's position in life. What about those who choose to wear the Chadri? A woman who wears the Chadri by choice among the western culture told me that she sees the Chadri as a blessing. She says, "Covered Body, Open Mind." For her, the Chadri is a source of empowerment. She does not have to abide by the constant female scrutiny that comes between women and their drive for just equality. For her, it helps her to see her true potential as a mind.
The same way the Chadri is used, clothing is used everywhere.
 Short skits and Low cut shirts are another example of clothing that prohibits female empowerment. Once again, it only has the power that we give it. It is just as likely that a woman will say that she wears short skirts because she likes to feel the breeze! By changing the way that women in the world dress, we will NOT change our positions in society. The sooner that we get off of the idea that the Chadri, Burqa, and all other head coverings are holding back MENA and Islamic women, then the sooner we will be able to address the real needs and concerns of these women.
Asking them where they want to see change is the only real source of female empowerment in the region and the best source of development for the world.

Reflection 9

It is a little early to do a reflection for the week but I went to a really interesting event yesterday and wanted to write about it while it was still fresh in my mind. Presented by the foreign service sorority at AU, prince Turki Al Faisal spoke to a bunch of students and professors in the SIS Founders Room. The prince was formerly the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S. and spoke about Saudi Arabia’s development and successes, as it becomes what he deemed a more modern nation. I found it interesting that he focused a lot on the improving education system in Saudi Arabia, because the education system is something we have talked a lot about in our country briefs on the nation. He also stressed the importance of vocational training and expressed a desire for youth the look for jobs not only in the government but also in the private sector. The prince said that though Saudi Arabia is not a completely modern state, it is well on its way to becoming one. He acknowledged the problem of unemployment and Internet connectivity in the nation, but seemed to dismiss the problems as of lesser importance than they are in reality.

He also completely ignored the problems of human rights violations and women’s rights in the country until the audience was allowed to ask questions, and a student asked about the very low ranking that Saudi Arabia has when it comes to women’s rights and their employment. The prince countered this question but arguing that Saudi Arabia is greatly improving the chances for women to become educated and employed, stating that the employment rate for women in the country has risen from around 5% ten years ago to around 15% now. Though this is a large improvement, the rate is still disturbingly low. Faisal also said that Saudi Arabian women should seek employment because a woman in the work force is desirable by suitors – a statement that enraged many women in the room, including the friend I attended the event with who is from Saudi Arabia and studying here at American. My friend told me after the event that the prince’s words were completely untrue and that many men in the country seek wives who are unemployed and uneducated because they are easier to control.

Overall, the event was super interesting and listening to the prince speak was a lot more worthwhile because of the prior knowledge I have about Saudi Arabia as a result of working on the country briefs this semester. It was really fascinating to talk to my friend after the event about how she felt about some of the more controversial things Faisal had said. Though he provided some interesting information, the event was also a great display of government censorship and sugarcoating. 

Reflection #8

It's now been two days after the presidential election. It was a depressing night at American for those few Conservatives, but we have quite an election to look forward to in 2016. Honestly, I am much less angry about the President Obama being re-elected than I am about my senatorial candidate losing. I worked for 3 months on his campaign, travelled across Ohio seven times over, made around literally 6,000 phone calls, handed flyers out, prepared campaign videos, and all this with no profit.

Anyway, that is the extent of complaining i'll do. After all, Obama is our president and he deserves my respect as my leader. I am just going to go over some of the positives of the president's foreign policy. After all, it is always good to look from the opposite perspective. But more so, I just don't want to completely be a sore loser.

I think that the President has done a wonderful job within the realm of asymmetric warfare. Everyone knows about the Bin Laden raid. However there have been many more missions like it- often overlooked, the Taliban has been drastically weakening in Pakistan and Yemen due to American drone strikes. Furthermore, regarding the Libyan Revolution, I first criticized the intervention by NATO and our country's participation, but I believe that everything turning out surprisingly well. There were many news stories a month after the ousting of Gaddafi saying that Libyan approval rating of the U.S. rose significantly. I speculated that by Obama not "forcing" the revolution and/or overthrowing of a foreign leader, the Libyan people supported America more. Obama merely aided the revolution; he lent the Libyans a hand.

Reflection - Anjali

This week, I've been thinking a lot about how the elections would have impacted US's relations with the Middle East area. I personally think that not much would have changed regardless of whether Obama or Romney was in office in a few ways, but at the same time, I think that if Romney had been elected president our relationships with the Middle East most likely would have faltered. He is very much of the mindset that America has the responsibility to lead and intervene in countries that are not up to it's standards of democracy, and I do not necessarily think that this mindset would benefit our relationships with countries in the Middle East at all; I think that these countries need their own time with their own people to formulate what they think are the best ways to govern their country. There is a certain balance necessary between sovereignty and intervention, and I do not think that America's current intervention policies allow for state sovereignty, let alone Romney's policies.

Reflection 8

I hope everyone enjoyed his or her election night in DC! I was at the White House from around 11 to 1 and it was one of the most incredible/emotional experiences of my life. Being there pretty early, my friends and I got pretty crushed by the crowd as more and more people arrived after the results were announced. Chanting “4 more years” and “2 terms” with so many other enthusiastic young people was exciting. I felt extremely connected to all of the strangers around me, especially when everyone started singing the national anthem together.

My experience at the White House last night and early yesterday morning was my first time being in such a large crowd for such an emotional and exciting event. After being there, I understand better how protests and rallies during social movements, including those in the MENA region, are so powerful. The group mentality that is created is undeniable. Hopefully it makes sense when I say there was a sense of invincibility within the crowd. I hadn’t understood before why people would actually enjoy being so squished into a crowd with random strangers, and I still can’t really explain why it was so great. But for some reason, having that connection with so many people was thrilling and exhilarating. Though I was in the group for a different purpose compared with social movement protests in the MENA region, I can more easily understand why protests of that nature are successful and draw in so many people.