In class yesterday,
we discussed whether or not our generation promotes social justice, to what
extent, and why. One claim was that people limit or monitor bold views as they have to
worry about the consequences of their actions, but it’s always been this way.
We cannot claim we are more at risk of sacrificing a potential job than those
before us who fought for certain issues. America has not yet mastered
problems surrounding equality; in fact, they [problems] are foundational in United States’
history. At any given time, someone, a
group, a family, or a community, was fighting against injustice: the concern
for keeping a job and reputable name is not new – it is as old as our history.
This has always been, and will always be, but the point of activism is engaging
even when there may be sacrifices: the idea is fighting for the greater good –
rarely does this battle come without cost.
It
is true that some of us are lazy; like the first point, there have always been
lazy people, and there will always be lazy people, but I do not think that this is a defining characteristic of our technological use.
Technology allows us to participate in current events without getting out of
bed. This may be viewed as lazy, but it
is also a means of spreading a message at any given time – working smart,
rather than working hard. Some people
have financial capital stored and ready to use or invest: others have social
capital which is knowledge, power, or influence over others. Spreading
understanding is a key part of revolution.
Awareness is the spark that lights the fire. A problem cannot be tackled unless the
message is widespread.
Cohen and Schmidt make a valid point: connectivity will
bring people together without the obligation to entirely commit to a project,
but I disagree with their conclusion on the issue. They claim that worldwide connectivity will
not lead to fulfilled resolution (at any reasonable rate); I believe that it will helpV people from all walks of life and every region to band together to disclose
issues. There may be distractions: for
example, suddenly, we will know things about different regions and potentially
understand the severity of more problems, distracting from one present issue.
But I have faith in the future of activism.
I believe with more connectivity will come stronger movements and the
potential for revolution.
Even though involvement in different types of movements and revolutions while having the risk of losing your job is not new, the accessibility of your employer or anyone to know that has increased. Before you either had to had been taken a picture of or had to be seen by your coworker or employer. Your involvement in movements can be easily known just by looking you up on Facebook, Twitter, or any other social media. Your private life and interests have become more public than those of the people before us.
ReplyDeleteThe internet and social media sites have become a great tool and asset for movements and social groups to market and raise awareness for their cause. So this goes back to my idea that I stated in class, that social media and the internet is a double edge sword. The news from this revolution can be widely known very quickly as we can see from the Black Lives Matter and all the videos being "shared" and "retweeted." The public can now know more about a taboo issue than what is presented in the news.
So the social media webs can be a great public billboard but we are also left exposed in our personal life.
I agree that social media allows people to spread a message at any given time, whether it is in bed or at work. But I do believe that people are lazy, not because they lay in bed to spread the word, but because when it comes down to the nitty gritty and people are needed to physically stand behind an issue, most people do not follow through. They think that someone else will do it and that they don't have to worry about it; that their one voice won't make a difference, even though they believe that whatever they say online might. I also think that people think that their comments online contribute more to the cause then they actually do. Online sharing is an easy way to spread the word about an issue but not to prove that you stand behind it without the smokescreen of the internet.
ReplyDelete