I found some interesting articles on the 2014 mayoral election in Providence. Overall, voter turnout was down throughout the state from the previous election. I also found another article which does not provide hard numbers, but shows the distribution of votes based on neighborhood. The author comes to conclusions which may not be in line with what we have learned, but the map is eye-opening nonetheless.
http://www.rifuture.org/pvd-mayors-election-complicated-city-not-class-warfare.html
http://ripr.org/post/raimondo-ri-s-first-female-gov-elorza-wins-providence-mayor-s-race
Thursday, March 19, 2015
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Reflection on "Amazing Grace"
** I apologize for the late posting.
This week's reading, "Amazing Grace" by Kozol, was an engaging piece about social structures that strayed from the typical analytical or critical style used by writers on this topic. Rather than relying on cold and distant statistics, Kozol took a qualitative and immersive approach to understanding the urban poor by visiting the South Bronx (noted to be one of the most impoverished areas in the country) and maintaining dialogues with several individuals. By objectively retelling the stories of individuals living in the South Bronx and using their words when referencing conversations, Kozol managed to "humanize" the poor and made a successful appeal for systemic change.
Perhaps one of the most effective techniques utilized by Kozol was his ability to step aside, reserve judgment and allow those who are traditionally marginalized to tell their stories. This was most clearly evidenced by Kozol's interactions with Cliffie, a seven-year-old boy with whom the author took a tour of the South Bronx. Kozol allowed the boy to share his understanding of the world around him (e.g. allowing Cliffie to share his understanding of the incinerator) and marveled at Cliffie's level of insight. This was also evidenced by Kozol's interactions with Alice Washington, an HIV-positive woman, and her family as they struggled to obtain Social Security benefits and provide adequate medical care for Alice. Rather than intervening or explicitly stating that societal changes need to be made, Kozol allows these individuals to make a personal appeal to the reader for systemic change.
By allowing individuals such as Cliffie and Mrs. Washington to tell their stories, Kozol makes a strong argument for the fact that larger systemic problems play a role in perpetuating systems of poverty and privilege. A young child such as Cliffie cannot be held responsible for the inefficiency of the government, lack of safe housing and medical care and the turmoil that surrounds him. Similarly, individuals such as Alice Washington, a victim of domestic violence, several-time cancer survivor, and HIV-positive woman, cannot be held responsible for a system that perpetuates violence, oppression and discrimination. Ultimately, Kozol successfully argues through the platform he has given to the urban poor of the South Bronx and many other anecdotes that poverty is not something that can be resolved by isolating the poor geographically and denying them access to resources.
This week's reading, "Amazing Grace" by Kozol, was an engaging piece about social structures that strayed from the typical analytical or critical style used by writers on this topic. Rather than relying on cold and distant statistics, Kozol took a qualitative and immersive approach to understanding the urban poor by visiting the South Bronx (noted to be one of the most impoverished areas in the country) and maintaining dialogues with several individuals. By objectively retelling the stories of individuals living in the South Bronx and using their words when referencing conversations, Kozol managed to "humanize" the poor and made a successful appeal for systemic change.
Perhaps one of the most effective techniques utilized by Kozol was his ability to step aside, reserve judgment and allow those who are traditionally marginalized to tell their stories. This was most clearly evidenced by Kozol's interactions with Cliffie, a seven-year-old boy with whom the author took a tour of the South Bronx. Kozol allowed the boy to share his understanding of the world around him (e.g. allowing Cliffie to share his understanding of the incinerator) and marveled at Cliffie's level of insight. This was also evidenced by Kozol's interactions with Alice Washington, an HIV-positive woman, and her family as they struggled to obtain Social Security benefits and provide adequate medical care for Alice. Rather than intervening or explicitly stating that societal changes need to be made, Kozol allows these individuals to make a personal appeal to the reader for systemic change.
By allowing individuals such as Cliffie and Mrs. Washington to tell their stories, Kozol makes a strong argument for the fact that larger systemic problems play a role in perpetuating systems of poverty and privilege. A young child such as Cliffie cannot be held responsible for the inefficiency of the government, lack of safe housing and medical care and the turmoil that surrounds him. Similarly, individuals such as Alice Washington, a victim of domestic violence, several-time cancer survivor, and HIV-positive woman, cannot be held responsible for a system that perpetuates violence, oppression and discrimination. Ultimately, Kozol successfully argues through the platform he has given to the urban poor of the South Bronx and many other anecdotes that poverty is not something that can be resolved by isolating the poor geographically and denying them access to resources.
Monday, February 2, 2015
Reflection on "The Forest and the Trees"
Choose three significant QUOTES from the text and explain what they mean, their relevance and how they have shaped your understanding of this text.
This week's reading was an excerpt from Allan G. Johnson's introduction to sociological practice "The Forest and the Trees: Sociology as Life, Practice, and Promise". In this chapter, Allan addresses his definition of sociology, provides an understanding of the concept of "systems", introduces a "systems orientation" to understanding social issues and discusses the pitfalls of an individualistic orientation to solving social issues. In today's blog, I will discuss three quotes which greatly enhanced my understanding of the reading and gave me greater insight into the author's purpose.
Early in the piece, Johnson posits that our conception of society and social problems is distorted by the overwhelmingly prevalent belief in individualism, the idea that we, as individuals, shape our destiny and are solely responsible for the consequences. By adhering to an individualist stance, we are more likely to propose solutions to social problems that put responsibility on the individuals, as opposed to the structures or systems in place that allow such problems to exist in the first place. In order to begin to bring about lasting change, Johnson argues that we must first become aware that "We are always participating in something larger than ourselves and if we want to understand social life and what happens to people in it, we have to understand what it is that we're participating in and how we participate in it" (Johnson, 12; italics in original). This quote enhanced my understanding of the text because it clearly articulated the author's takeaway message and made me realize the rest of the text was going to focus on how we become aware of what and how we participate in society.
Another significant quote in the text occurred within Johnson's continued discussion of the role that individualistic attitudes play in perpetuating ineffective solutions to problems. Johnson argues that privileged individuals often take offense when oppressed individuals call society "racist" or "sexist" because they falsely equate society with people and often view injustice with a sense of guilt. In order to alleviate this guilt and help bring about change, Johnson argues that the solution is to "realize that the system isn't me and I'm not the system" (Johnson, 16). This quote enhanced my understanding of Johnson's argument because it made me realize that guilt or actions completed out of guilt will only lead to short-term solutions whose ultimate goal (whether realized or not) is to make the privileged feel as though they do not share responsibility to alleviate perpetuating structures of injustice and oppression. In a sense, the privileged can rationalize that they are not directly participating in perpetuating an oppressive society, despite the fact that they frequently enjoy numerous benefits as a result of this skewed system.
A final quote that I found particularly significant to my understanding of the text occurred in the context of Johnson's discussion of individual versus systemic change. Johnson argues that systemic change does not have to ignore individuals making changes in their lives; rather, we must acknowledge that although "[s]ystems don't change without people changing at one point or another,... no system can change through individual change alone" (Johnson, 31). This enhanced my understanding of the text because it made me realize that even though systematic change cannot occur solely through individual change, this does not mean that many individuals making conscious changes in their lives is unimportant for the health of society. Without a few individuals becoming critical of structures and making personal changes, we would have an entire society which is completely blind to the processes of privilege and oppression operating within our "purely democratic and equal opportunity" society.
This week's reading was an excerpt from Allan G. Johnson's introduction to sociological practice "The Forest and the Trees: Sociology as Life, Practice, and Promise". In this chapter, Allan addresses his definition of sociology, provides an understanding of the concept of "systems", introduces a "systems orientation" to understanding social issues and discusses the pitfalls of an individualistic orientation to solving social issues. In today's blog, I will discuss three quotes which greatly enhanced my understanding of the reading and gave me greater insight into the author's purpose.
Early in the piece, Johnson posits that our conception of society and social problems is distorted by the overwhelmingly prevalent belief in individualism, the idea that we, as individuals, shape our destiny and are solely responsible for the consequences. By adhering to an individualist stance, we are more likely to propose solutions to social problems that put responsibility on the individuals, as opposed to the structures or systems in place that allow such problems to exist in the first place. In order to begin to bring about lasting change, Johnson argues that we must first become aware that "We are always participating in something larger than ourselves and if we want to understand social life and what happens to people in it, we have to understand what it is that we're participating in and how we participate in it" (Johnson, 12; italics in original). This quote enhanced my understanding of the text because it clearly articulated the author's takeaway message and made me realize the rest of the text was going to focus on how we become aware of what and how we participate in society.
Another significant quote in the text occurred within Johnson's continued discussion of the role that individualistic attitudes play in perpetuating ineffective solutions to problems. Johnson argues that privileged individuals often take offense when oppressed individuals call society "racist" or "sexist" because they falsely equate society with people and often view injustice with a sense of guilt. In order to alleviate this guilt and help bring about change, Johnson argues that the solution is to "realize that the system isn't me and I'm not the system" (Johnson, 16). This quote enhanced my understanding of Johnson's argument because it made me realize that guilt or actions completed out of guilt will only lead to short-term solutions whose ultimate goal (whether realized or not) is to make the privileged feel as though they do not share responsibility to alleviate perpetuating structures of injustice and oppression. In a sense, the privileged can rationalize that they are not directly participating in perpetuating an oppressive society, despite the fact that they frequently enjoy numerous benefits as a result of this skewed system.
A final quote that I found particularly significant to my understanding of the text occurred in the context of Johnson's discussion of individual versus systemic change. Johnson argues that systemic change does not have to ignore individuals making changes in their lives; rather, we must acknowledge that although "[s]ystems don't change without people changing at one point or another,... no system can change through individual change alone" (Johnson, 31). This enhanced my understanding of the text because it made me realize that even though systematic change cannot occur solely through individual change, this does not mean that many individuals making conscious changes in their lives is unimportant for the health of society. Without a few individuals becoming critical of structures and making personal changes, we would have an entire society which is completely blind to the processes of privilege and oppression operating within our "purely democratic and equal opportunity" society.
Saturday, January 31, 2015
Sobering Statistics on CEOs in America
While completing my first assignment for this course, I stumbled upon numerous statistics about CEOs in America that were both shocking and eye-opening. According to work.chron.com, the average income for a Fortune 500 CEO in 2012 was $10.5 million (3.5 million of which consisted of the CEOs' salaries and bonuses; 3.8 million went to "personal perk packages" and the remaining 3.2 million came from "exercising vested stock options and awards") as compared $176,550 for the average American CEO. The 2012 top salary earner was John H. Hammergren of McKesson, with a 1-year pay of $131.19 million and $51.6 million in stock shares (according to Forbes.com). In total, the combined compensation for all CEOs on the Fortune 500 list was 5.2 billion dollars (probably larger than many developing nations' annual budgets).
While these numbers are rather large, perhaps an even more sobering number to look at is the pay ratio, a measure of the CEO's pay as compared to a typical worker. The worst offender in 2012 (according to go.bloomberg.com) was Ronald Johnson, now former CEO of J.C. Penney, whose $53.3 million dollar salary was in stark contrast to the average JC Penney employee salary of $29,688, leading to an astounding pay ratio of 1,795 to 1. While several companies on the list complained to Bloomberg that this ratio used outdated methodology and was false, Johnson did not make a statement.
If these statistics do not make your blood boil, here's a last set (courtesy of work.chron.com): In 2012, the Fortune 500 CEOs experienced a 16% increase in total compensation while the average American worker only experienced a 3% increase at the same time. What these statistics suggest to me is a rampant case of political interest and corporate greed getting in the way of creating a "healthy" quality of life for millions of Americans. These excessive pay ratios need to be called into question and the structures that allow the perpetuation of corporate greed and power as it stands must be modified and/or dismantled.
While these numbers are rather large, perhaps an even more sobering number to look at is the pay ratio, a measure of the CEO's pay as compared to a typical worker. The worst offender in 2012 (according to go.bloomberg.com) was Ronald Johnson, now former CEO of J.C. Penney, whose $53.3 million dollar salary was in stark contrast to the average JC Penney employee salary of $29,688, leading to an astounding pay ratio of 1,795 to 1. While several companies on the list complained to Bloomberg that this ratio used outdated methodology and was false, Johnson did not make a statement.
If these statistics do not make your blood boil, here's a last set (courtesy of work.chron.com): In 2012, the Fortune 500 CEOs experienced a 16% increase in total compensation while the average American worker only experienced a 3% increase at the same time. What these statistics suggest to me is a rampant case of political interest and corporate greed getting in the way of creating a "healthy" quality of life for millions of Americans. These excessive pay ratios need to be called into question and the structures that allow the perpetuation of corporate greed and power as it stands must be modified and/or dismantled.
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Introduction
Hello everyone who happens to stumble upon this blog!
My name is Amanda and I am currently a senior at Rhode Island College pursuing degrees in psychology and chemical dependency/addiction studies (CDAS) and a minor in gender and women's studies. My reasons for taking this course are twofold: to fulfill a requirement for my gender and women's studies minor and to increase my awareness of class issues and how gender, racial and other dimensions of identity intersect with class. My hope is that this course will help me to become a more empathic and competent future clinician by forcing me to reflect on societal and personal constructions of class.
When I am not in class, I can be found doing any of the following: hanging out with family and friends, reading, knitting, ballroom dancing with my boyfriend, working at my local public library, or suggesting sponges as a cashier at your favorite store. With regards to break, it was busy and went by too fast; however, I am looking forward to the things that this semester has to offer!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)