KCRW Podcast Analysis
Podcast November 20, 2015 : The Paris Attacks
On November 13th, 2015 there were several terrorist attacks in Paris, which caused huge uproar across the world and reviving similar emotions for the French due to the Charlie Hebdo attacks in January of this year. The host opens the podcast with a question for one of the guests, Rich Lowry, about a phenomenon he labeled and what he thought of it. Lowry replied that although the “I am Charlie” or “Je Suis Charlie” was a sweet sentiment, none of us were actually brave enough to draw cartoons of Mohammed at risk of our life. After the Paris attacks, another symbol was spread on the internet of the peace symbol with the Eiffel Tower inside of it. Believing this gesture is often a substitute of thought of the actual event itself, the public in fear of having an opinion of what to do, Lowry states, “having these kind of feel-good symbols online has really nothing to do with the nature of the threat and how to address it.” The host, follows by questioning if there is a “right” or “wrong” way to react to these sort of tragic events. After the bombings in Beirut and the Russian aircraft shot down in Egypt, the lack of outcry for those attacks was almost as astounding as the tremendous outcry for the attacks in Paris. A comparison to the Boston Marathon was made to relate the analysis of the attacks and one guest said he’d prefer peace symbols spreading than threats to “kill a lot of people”. However, the thought of money flow in Saudi Arabia and the other countries that fund these types of Muslim extremists groups is questioned and taken into account of if someone was to go out and kill these people, who would they actually need to kill to hold responsible? Similarly, the notion is made of whether or not killing the approximate 33,000 people involved with ISIS would actually solve the problem. As one speaker put it, without the history to back up these events and how to deal with them, someone is simply putting out “feel-good” politics even if the idea is promote “random murder”.
Obviously, Syrian Refugees are brought into the equation and questioned on what to do about them. Another guest brings up the reality of America not having the same issues as other European countries in relation to the refugees for several reasons. First, America has tried cultural integration before and has succeed relatively well. Second, France and other countries have thousands upon thousands of refugees. Europe seems to be having a greater radicalization problem, receiving so many refugees that they are having problems with integration; however, America is taking less refugees and is handling the situation very well. Thus, the question is posed, should America be taking in more refugees now that Europe is seemingly reaching it’s limits? As a response, one guest establishes there is another strong distinction between America and France in that France has more of a “blood in soil” background which was never really the case for the U.S., at least not in the same way. It’s clear that there have been more public interest in refusing Syrian Refugees and scapegoating as well as irrational thinking were blamed for this reaction of the public. Another guest, reminds us that for over 14 years there were “boots on the ground” in the Middle East and that American’s really needs to rethink what the idea of security really means.
On November 13th, 2015 there were several terrorist attacks in Paris, which caused huge uproar across the world and reviving similar emotions for the French due to the Charlie Hebdo attacks in January of this year. The host opens the podcast with a question for one of the guests, Rich Lowry, about a phenomenon he labeled and what he thought of it. Lowry replied that although the “I am Charlie” or “Je Suis Charlie” was a sweet sentiment, none of us were actually brave enough to draw cartoons of Mohammed at risk of our life. After the Paris attacks, another symbol was spread on the internet of the peace symbol with the Eiffel Tower inside of it. Believing this gesture is often a substitute of thought of the actual event itself, the public in fear of having an opinion of what to do, Lowry states, “having these kind of feel-good symbols online has really nothing to do with the nature of the threat and how to address it.” The host, follows by questioning if there is a “right” or “wrong” way to react to these sort of tragic events. After the bombings in Beirut and the Russian aircraft shot down in Egypt, the lack of outcry for those attacks was almost as astounding as the tremendous outcry for the attacks in Paris. A comparison to the Boston Marathon was made to relate the analysis of the attacks and one guest said he’d prefer peace symbols spreading than threats to “kill a lot of people”. However, the thought of money flow in Saudi Arabia and the other countries that fund these types of Muslim extremists groups is questioned and taken into account of if someone was to go out and kill these people, who would they actually need to kill to hold responsible? Similarly, the notion is made of whether or not killing the approximate 33,000 people involved with ISIS would actually solve the problem. As one speaker put it, without the history to back up these events and how to deal with them, someone is simply putting out “feel-good” politics even if the idea is promote “random murder”.
Obviously, Syrian Refugees are brought into the equation and questioned on what to do about them. Another guest brings up the reality of America not having the same issues as other European countries in relation to the refugees for several reasons. First, America has tried cultural integration before and has succeed relatively well. Second, France and other countries have thousands upon thousands of refugees. Europe seems to be having a greater radicalization problem, receiving so many refugees that they are having problems with integration; however, America is taking less refugees and is handling the situation very well. Thus, the question is posed, should America be taking in more refugees now that Europe is seemingly reaching it’s limits? As a response, one guest establishes there is another strong distinction between America and France in that France has more of a “blood in soil” background which was never really the case for the U.S., at least not in the same way. It’s clear that there have been more public interest in refusing Syrian Refugees and scapegoating as well as irrational thinking were blamed for this reaction of the public. Another guest, reminds us that for over 14 years there were “boots on the ground” in the Middle East and that American’s really needs to rethink what the idea of security really means.
After hearing this podcast, the comment that stuck with me the most was one of historical contextualization. A guest brought up the idea of how obviously, due to different cultures, backgrounds, and histories, to say one country is reacting “wrong” and another “right” is very black or white thinking and I would have to agree. As a French citizen, the Paris attacks were tragic for me to hear about on the news, having family and friends in the city or in the general vicinities of the attacks. However the most astounding reaction was blaming the Syrian refugees. Also noted in the podcast, was the fact that these terrorists were in fact French, not Syrian and although they were linked with ISIS, they were not refugees. There are much bigger conversations to be had rather than whether or not the feel-good symbols are doing anything or who to kill; there is much more than just black or white to this situation and in order for the United States and other European countries to be safe, a thorough plan of action must be made.
Podcast November 27, 2015 : A Thankful Roundtable
The speakers of Left, Right, & Center take this podcast time to speak of the things they’re thankful for. One mentions the invention of modern medicine and how it truly is one of the greatest gifts we can have in this day and age. The speaker even gives an example of George Washington’s throat infection at the end of his life and how it got to the point where he didn’t even want “treatment” anymore because of the horrifying things they had done to him. Again bringing up how doctors actually try to help the people, as well as dentists, and how even if medical procedures are uncomfortable, they are tremendously better than in previous history. However, the debate of healthcare is mentioned after this statement of gratitude with notes on how although medical care has improved tremendously, there are still hardships for those who cannot afford it or otherwise do not have access to such privilege. However, there was counter argument of does modern medicine indeed make us all healthier? The mention of Cancer treatments that only extend life expectancy to a couple months, as well as other expensive medical treatments that don’t necessarily seem to be doing much of anything were all brought up. The deflection to this statement was including the greater pro of medical care and the security in which it encompass rather than the limited con (in the grander scheme of things) of expenses.
Another speaker says they are thankful for the 9 organizations, primarily religious affiliated, that handle refugee resettlement within the nation as well as advocating welcoming Syrian and Muslim refugees. Believing they are doing a great job of promoting the religious freedoms on which the country is founded on, the left-wing guest is hoping the work of these groups will help the public celebrate the following holidays in December with open eyes to other religious groups. A guest stating that American’s have stood for the idea of “not letting the terrorists win” brings up that terrorism is theatrical in nature, knowing they usually do not have the resources to actual start war, therefore they go after the public’s minds and play on their fears. Thus, the same guest believes the anti-refugee uproar is ISIS’ way of “winning” and deteriorating the American values, which is exactly what they are set out to do. However, the United States still holds a very open immigration policy in comparison to other advanced countries in the world and is now being scrutinized for being a bunch of immigrants as well since that was how the country was founded. The right-wing guest mentions that the obsession of accepting 10,000 Syrian refugees should not undermine the 70,000 refugees the country takes in every year or that it undermines the American traditions or values. Also mentioned by the same speaker, the weight held on about this small increment of refugees is tremendous and should not hold any precedent over any other country’s refugees trying to come to the country. If someone really wants to help these Syrian refugees, it needs to be reminded that there are millions in other countries, such as Turkey, that need assistance as well not just relocation to the United States. The primary host, however, mentions that the policies of allowing 0 refugees or 10,000 refugees really hold the same principal in that they don’t help much in the overall scheme of things of the crisis in Syria. However, the counter argument from the left side is that the refugees are primarily women and children, therefore the 10,000 refugees should not be a scary prospect for the American citizens.
Another speaker says they are thankful for the 9 organizations, primarily religious affiliated, that handle refugee resettlement within the nation as well as advocating welcoming Syrian and Muslim refugees. Believing they are doing a great job of promoting the religious freedoms on which the country is founded on, the left-wing guest is hoping the work of these groups will help the public celebrate the following holidays in December with open eyes to other religious groups. A guest stating that American’s have stood for the idea of “not letting the terrorists win” brings up that terrorism is theatrical in nature, knowing they usually do not have the resources to actual start war, therefore they go after the public’s minds and play on their fears. Thus, the same guest believes the anti-refugee uproar is ISIS’ way of “winning” and deteriorating the American values, which is exactly what they are set out to do. However, the United States still holds a very open immigration policy in comparison to other advanced countries in the world and is now being scrutinized for being a bunch of immigrants as well since that was how the country was founded. The right-wing guest mentions that the obsession of accepting 10,000 Syrian refugees should not undermine the 70,000 refugees the country takes in every year or that it undermines the American traditions or values. Also mentioned by the same speaker, the weight held on about this small increment of refugees is tremendous and should not hold any precedent over any other country’s refugees trying to come to the country. If someone really wants to help these Syrian refugees, it needs to be reminded that there are millions in other countries, such as Turkey, that need assistance as well not just relocation to the United States. The primary host, however, mentions that the policies of allowing 0 refugees or 10,000 refugees really hold the same principal in that they don’t help much in the overall scheme of things of the crisis in Syria. However, the counter argument from the left side is that the refugees are primarily women and children, therefore the 10,000 refugees should not be a scary prospect for the American citizens.
Finally, a guest hispanic journalist says he is thankful for Donald Trump for several reasons. First, because he brought “interest” to the republican candidates. Second, he pushes journalists to focus on facts, something that has been seemingly forgotten among several. And finally because Trump might be remembered to bring political engagement among latinos; encouraging hispanic voter registration ironically. The host brings up the fact that Trump says some really terrible things and they used to be seen in a humorous light, but now he is simply saying terrible things, therefore, is the idea of him as a candidate still funny? In fact, a lot of the things Donald Trump says are simply not true and they certainly not funny, but there is a sort of humor in his “ignorance” so to speak or rather, his neutral mannerisms to the awful things he says, bringing an entertainment value to the political campaign. The right-wing speaker does mention he is not as thankful for Donald Trump, however, he does believe Trump gets away with a lot and taps into a deep part of the American character.
To conclude, I have several opinions on all these ideas to be thankful for. First, the medical advancements of our nation is a tremendous thing to be grateful for, there are still countries to this day that do not have nearly the same resources in which our citizens are at least exposed to. However, I do agree with the statement that although we all know we have it within the country does not mean everyone gets it. The biggest problem with healthcare is it’s limited access to those of lower financial standing. Secondly, the groups taking care and promoting welcoming refugees are great organizations to have within a country who has becoming seemingly cold to people in need and who are escaping war. Finally, Donald Trump. I don’t think I could say I am necessarily “thankful” for such a person existing in general, however, I do appreciate that his character as a troll has brought a lot of attention to the political issues going on, primarily among the youth of the nation. Due to Trump’s extreme ignorance, in my opinion, and arrogance, a lot of young people seem to be concerned with the upcoming political campaigns. There are a lot of things that this country should be grateful for, and these three things are just the tip of the iceberg.
Comments
Post a Comment