Equality for all vs. prosperity for some

President Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in a final sense a theft from those who are hungry and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed”. What do you guys think should take precedence, social issues at home or our “national security” and position on the world stage? Some argue that social inequalities will always exist so attempting to wipe them out is a waste. All we can do is alleviate the symptoms of social inequality as they manifest. While this argument is certainly logical, is it truly the best policy? Have we even tried addressing social needs with the same fervor we afford corporate gains?

It is sad to realize that a great deal of the prosperity we enjoy in this country is due to our militarism abroad. However, those who benefit the most from this militarism are the private security forces (as in mercenaries) and weapons makers. The benefits we gain from these actions are secondary and minimal when comapred to the capital gains of the military-industrial complex.

Should we focus on social problems that indeed may never go away or may just be replaced by different social problems? Or rather, should we focus on maintaining our security abroad along with our national interests? These are very different ways of tackling the economy. In theory, the former will provide for all and help society’s neediest, while the latter will bring about greater security and economic prosperity (also in theory). These two ideas do not have to be mutually exclusive. I ask this question however, because neoliberalism treats them in such a way. According to neoliberal policy, the government is to pull away from social issues and contract these tasks to non-profits so it can focus on protecting corporate interest and bringing the free market to new regions. Is there a way to make our country secure and protect our national interests (let’s they pretend they indeed are “national” and not corporate) that does not involve militarism?

What do you guys think? Can we afford to shift interests as a nation?

Is awareness enough?

Although there's quite a few studies on compassion fatigue among therapists that work with the chronically ill, it's also an issue that affects other therapists that work with other populations (i.e. substance abusers, juveniles, etc). On Thursday we talked about compassion fatigue and tried to tie this phenomenon with what we have observed at our internships. There's often a confusion between what is compassion fatigue and burnout. According to Figley (2002), "compassion fatigue, like any other kind of fatigue, reduces our capacity or our interest in bearing the suffering of others"(1434). On the other hand, burnout is "a state of physical, emotional, and mental exhaustion caused by long term involvement in emotionally demanding situations" (Figley, 2002, pg. 1436). Compassion fatigue is prominent in cases where a therapist is empathizing with their clients to a point where their exhausted and they cannot continue being compassionate. Burnout can affect anyone when they're exhausted from their work. Since compassion fatigue is something that is more prominent in the human services/social work field (which is usually comprised of mostly woman), do you think gender plays a role in who's more susceptible? Also, do you think educating therapists of this phenomenon is enough?

A Third Hour: Thinking about Juvenile Justice

Many thanks to President Travis for joining us in seminar and sharing with us his task force's fascinating, thoughtful report on juvenile justice in New York. We commented on how eye-opening the report was, but hearing about the process of creating the report took the topic to a new level. Many of our seminar discussions have focused not only on a justice-related issue, but on how systems/structures/institutions function both to solve and exaggerate problems. From the inspiring stories in Half the Sky to the heart-wrenching story of Willy, this semester we've considered the relationship between individuals fighting for social change as well as individuals getting trapped by the very institutions designed to solve the problems. The story of the task force's investigation, as well as the production and reception of the report, touch on many of the ideas we've been thinking about this semester. So this week, you are invited to continue our seminar discussion. If we had a third hour, what would you have liked to ask President Travis? What aspects of the report and our discussion would you want to explore further? Has any aspect of the report or the seminar stuck with you as you continued with your busy week?

I have also set up links (in the Check It Out section) to pieces mentioned by President Travis in our discussion. The first is a piece by Jennifer Gonnerman that ran in January in New York Magazine, "The Lost Boys of Tryon." The second is Mayor Bloomberg's State of the City address. These pieces, both good reads, provide a range of responses to these questions, from despair over how things are to hope about how things could be. Feel free to respond to these pieces, as well, in your comment.