The implications of living in the era of "The Other"

    I think one of the issues as to why the world is not able to fully be immersed in globalization because we are still living in the era of "The Other". Being in the other means that our human nature tries to find connections with other people that we have not met before or we do not know much about their culture. If that culture does not connect to our own culture, we see it as other. For example, in the reading, Todorov reading Columbus finds beauty and was in awe of the Natives, but when he realized that he was different from them he did not see them as humans but as others.   
When a state sees another state as an "other" it does not create a community in which globalization can be achieved. Today, with immigration I feel that our state treats people who are undocumented as an "other". Since we do this we do not find the time to hear undocumented citizens out and understand their story. I think as a state we create a narrative that undocumented citizens are here to steal something when I think undocumented citizens come to gain something like freedom or opportunities that they are not financially able cover.   
 Even the language we use to communicate and connect with others makes them an "other". For example, calling someone an illegal turns that person into a crime instead of a person. If someone murders someone, which is an illegal crime, we call them murderers, not illegals. But we create this language because as a state we see immigrants as someone who is unknown and not relatable because of their status as citizens. That image that we put it does not go unseen and other states will see how we other and they will be influenced as well.  That creates a chain of making people feel like another and not apart of the globe together. I believe that we should honor citizens of the globes for their differences and make another feel they have to change or completely assimilate into the opposite culture.


Comments

  1. UnknownDecember 8, 2017 at 2:16 PM

    I liked how you connected Columbus into globalization here since when he realized they were different he made an effort to try to make him like himself. I feel like this is a key part of globalization and influencing others through media, cultures, and many others as well. Also I do not necessarily understand how you are mentioning immigrants because basically everyone in the United States are immigrants due their ancestors who legally came to the U.S. But I do agree with your point of honoring other citizens of the globe and appreciating their differences.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Victoria PierreDecember 9, 2017 at 8:59 PM

      Sydney, I mentioned immigrant because in the Todorov article Columbus talks about Natives being an other and I was trying to relate how in the present day we think of immigrants as an other. But if we want to be a more globalized world we need to see each and apart of each other and not an other.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blog 3 Jared Rostkowski Why NAFTA is not "The worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever"

Why NAFTA isn't “The worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever” Jared Rostkowski On September 25th 2016 during the first presidential debate of 2016, then Presidential candidate Donald Trump described the North American Free Trade Agreement as “The worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever.” NAFTA is the trade agreement between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, which eliminated tariffs between the three countries. Trump has continued to voice his displeasure with the trade deal, mostly with Mexico. Anyway, NAFTA is not the worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, in fact, it is actually a trade deal that the 3 countries benefit greatly from the trade deal, and we should not pull out of it anytime soon.  So what does Trump dislike about the deal. His main displeasure comes with the fact that many companies from the U.S. are moving manufacturing to Mexico, to take advantage of Mexico’s cheap labor. Trump argued that companies like For...
Read more

Blog Post 4 - Yousuf Sander

Global terror has plagued the international community in increasing frequency and tragedy for the last two decades. The rise of groups like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Hamas, and others have left thousands dead and given rise to new fear, and an elusive enemy. These groups have used ever more brutal tactics to stage devastating attacks on civilians in both their home countries and abroad. In the early 2000s, the U.S. began a so-called “ War On Terror ” to combat the rise of such groups, only to have the even more dangerous organization of ISIS rise out of the ashes of our own operations in Iraq. These groups are hard to fight and even harder to dismantle, so what are our options in the War on Terror? I believe that the problem stems from the ostracized environment in which immigrant Middle eastern communities exist in the West.   As long as we continue to marginalize Muslim communities in the U.S. and Europe, we will continue to be fostering an environment that makes it easy for terrorist gr...
Read more
Yousuf Sander                          Why Syrian Intervention is a Bad Play for the U.S. Foreign intervention has become a staple policy choice if the United States since the early decades of the 20 th century. Time and time again, we have intervened in order to protect our interests, installing dictators in Latin America, toppling them in the middle east, all in order to protect our foreign interests. However, what is the right course of action when a crisis occurs that does not put our interests at stake? How, as the world ’ s foremost superpower, can we sit by and do nothing as the crisis evolves in Syria? Though intervention may seem like the obvious choice, we must weigh the costs, and our decision must be strategically based and thought out. For this reason, I don ’ t believe intervention is the right option due to the reactionary and impulsive nature ...
Read more