America on the edge, Part C: Spelling it [out]!

When I started writing "America on the edge" my focus was gun violence in the United States; nonetheless, profound social questions can seldom be confined, spanning as they do across different sectors of society. Today's post -the third and final one in the series- deals with failing schools in America: a reality that is diametrically opposed to the picture of schools painted in the previous post and arguably a source of concern for Americans, even when it comes to gun violence.

With the same ease one can find in the United States model public schools boasting exemplary facilities -absent from many private schools- and innovative curricula, one can also find failing schools with students unable to read or do basic math despite years of schooling. And such schools are not difficult to spot, located as they are in major metropolitan cities like New York and Los Angeles. The controversial "No Child Left Behind Act" is in many ways problematic [despite some good intentions] and more importantly inefficient according to a recent article published in the New York Times; Diana Schemo argues that shutting down schools -a requirement for those schools judged as failing- presents educators with few solutions as on how to deal with the major of problem of generations of children growing without receiving basic literacy skills.

Overly packed schools with failing students present America with a formidable challenge that spans well beyond the inability of students to perform on the infamous standardized tests; such schools are taking the cohesion of the social fabric to the limits. Social ills are often recruited by proponents of gun ownership as evidence to justify increasing gun violence in what is admittedly an attempt to deflect attention from the abundance of guns that circulate almost freely in society. And while it is true that poverty in conjunction with dysfunctional schools account for much of social instability it would be an unfair stretch to argue that social conditions account for the exacerbation of the gun violence we see all over; in fact, let us be reminded of the fact that many of the deadly incidents occurred in socially stable settings.

Rather than trying to draw the line between the two camps, what is a more enlightening path for the understanding of this major issue is to underline the salient feature of American society to host extreme manifestations of any given behavior. Hence for example the best of best schools and the failing schools coexisting within miles. Or, conversely, fierce proponents in either side of the gun ownership question at times refusing to sit on the same round table, let alone to engage in a meaningful discussion.

A trait of American democracy and a product of the convoluted formation of the nation, tolerance is surely a source of strength in America; yet on occasion it may also be nothing short of a colossal vulnerability.

Reference
if registered with the New York Times:
Failing Schools Strain to meet U.S. Standard

America on the edge, Part B: Voices. Echoes?

(continued from previous post) ... like the fact that 8 year-olds openly talk about shooting.

If this statement is shocking to you (as it was to me), I am sorry to report that it actually gets worse. "Shooting" was not a random thing a young boy brought up and I happened to hear. Nor it was, of course, the subject matter of a discussion in which the little one happened to be present. It was not even a discussion about the "evils" of society. The young boy provided this response when he was asked to name a negative quality that he did not want his best friend to possess.

And now picture this: the incident happened in the local elementary school where the little one is a student. His friends and classmates were naturally present - in fact many of them were sitting just next to him as they were all participating in an activity, which was asking them to name, precisely, "the good qualities they wanted their best friends to possess" and "the bad qualities they did not wish their friends to possess".

Along with such common and anticipated answers like "I want my friend to be kind", "I want my friend to be polite", "I don't want my friend to be jealous of me" - I hear this young boy talking about shooting. And naturally I lose my voice...

I have no knowledge of or training in psychology and yet it seems bewilderingly scary to me that a young boy gave such an answer, to such a question, in a school and in the aftermath of the deadly shooting incidents that have claimed the lives of so many students and others in the United States. Again, I will refrain from taking this point further; but I must admit that I take nothing to be a more serious warning of the urgent need to delve into the issue of "shooting" as well as to dig the ground around it than the response of that 8 year old. Not next month, not next week. Today.

On a more positive now, I must mention that the children were participating in an after-school program the purpose of which is to foster peace in schools. By playing games young children learn peaceful ways to manage their anger and to resolve conflict. This excellent initiative is is the fruit of a non-governmental organization based in Boston, MA called "Peace Games".

The website of "Peace Games"

America on the edge, Part A: Facing a dead-end?

An open wound that has proved difficult to heal in America is the plight of widespread private weapon ownership - specifically high crime rates resulting from guns put into use against targeted individuals or the wide public. In fact it appears that the wound has become gravely affected; two of the most deathly incidents involving indiscriminate public shootings have occurred within the past twelve months, the first in Pennsylvania, the second in Virginia. And while the Amish killings and the Virginia Tech massacre respectively haunt our individual and collective memories, a Cleveland teenager came very close to lengthening the list of gruesome incidents: on Wednesday, October 10, he opened fire at his former high school wounding four before killling himself.

That no band-aid exists to stop the excessive bleeding and that no pill can cure the wound from inside-out is of course alarming; it is also a testimony to the fact that the ill is much more serious and complex than it is often made appear. Last week's edition of the British "Observer" features staggering statistics about deaths from shootings as well as a comprehensive analysis of the root causes of gun violence in the United States -including political, sociological, historic, legal arguments- only to conclude that weapons are intertwined with American culture and hence almost impossible to combat.

The political response to the shootings of last year centers around a Bill passed by the US House of Representatives which stipulated among others that there must be rigorous background check of prospective gun holders to reduce the probability of weapons reaching people not fit to use them. Still, the Bill is at an early stage and must go through the Senate before it reaches the President.

Of course I do not claim to have the solution to this complex problem. On the other hand, I feel extremely uncomfortable with the "hands-off" approach or the quiescence of many who refuse to even bring up the question. I am also very skeptical of the thesis that gun possession serves their owners as a means of self-defense. Is this the way to go about solving violence? Is arming people making America more safe? I highly doubt it. Not only that, but I believe that the argument is in its core flawed: suppose momentarily the proposition was correct - what about all the people that cannot afford a weapon? Would they not have the right to feel safe in their country?

It is true that weapons alone cannot be held responsible for the form of urban violence one sees today. But they do trigger some very nasty situations - and this should concern people. It should not take another tragedy in some other state to take serious action. When we speak of safety in America, it should not involve terrorism discourse only. Threats need not result from the outside, they can very much originate inside America.

Sadly, the answers seem no longer/not anymore [pending your perspective] satisfactory. Worse still, there are a number of other things that should concern like... (to be continued...)


Reference

Guns take pride of place in US family values

"We are all Hokies now"

"Hokie"

Just like in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, French daily Le Monde had published the famous "On est tous Americains" [We are all Americans], students and more broadly Americans sympathize with the plight of students and the entire community at Virginia Tech after the massacre of this past Monday. To signal their compassion, sympathy and sorrow students from all over the US will largely participate in the events of Friday, April 20 to commemorate and honor the victims and will be wearing orange and maroon clothes given that such are the official colors of Virginia Tech.

"Hokie" is the bird mascot of Virginia Tech; yet unlike many other school mascots whose task is primarily to foster school spirit in athletic competitions and appear on school logos and insignia, Hokie has been charged with the unsurmountable task of raising up the morale in what has been a tragedy of "monumental proportions" to quote Virginia Tech President, Dr. Charles Steiger. And indeed it will take time and effort in order to heal - the quick passing of the US President from Virginia Tech is important, but will not do the job in itself.

I perceive the Virginia Tech tragedy as part of a bigger question on the culture of violence and weapons in the US. While this does little, if anything, to mitigate my profound distress and sorrow for the 32 murdered at Norris and Ambler Johnston Halls, I cannot but see in this tragedy pictures from the Amish killings or the Columbine tragedy, all infamous cases involving shooting and innocent deaths. Treating the Virginia Tech massacre outside its true context may speed up the healing process and may enable an easier archiving of the case. But it will not honor the victims.

It is breathtaking really to see the level of support and sympathy from colleges all across the US who stand by Virginia Tech students: using modern technology and social networks such as Facebook.com or more traditional means and ways all stand by the students and the community at Virginia Tech. Most schools have a letter of sympathy and solidarity published in their website. Students organize vigils and raise funds for the Virginia Tech memorial fund. And it is not surprising this really given how vibrant student communities in the US are. For one thing, if students do something other than studying and studying hard this is to be compassionate individuals and produce tangible results to better the world they live in. To date, no one forgets that the Free Speech movement started in 1964, in the University of California at Berkeley...












"Hybrid logos" of students from Stanford University, George Mason University and Tufts University [all from www.facebook.com; VT logo from "A tribute to those who passed at the Virginia Tech Shooting"; Stanford and George Mason logos from "Remembering Virginia Tech Students 4/16/07" and Tufts logo courtesy of Mike Sidebottom)]

Top of the post: "The Hokie", the mascot of Virginia Tech
(http://www.hokiesports.com/hokiespirit/)

Post-Olympic "fiesta"

It has been a while since I last posted anything and this was not because I lacked ideas. As I sit down and read my scribbles on news I have read or observations I have made in the past days, I find a lot indeed; I will devote however this post to something that happened in my native country, Greece, a few days ago and with which I still cannot make peace: the killing of young man as a consequence of mob fighting between fans of the two major sports' clubs in a suburb of Athens.

For anyone who is Greek the story is no news by now. For the rest let me simply say that in the context of a volleyball game fans of the two major teams, Panathinaikos and Olympiakos, "met" in order "to put an end" to some hitherto unresolved claims and contentions. And they did put an end indeed - in the life of a 25 year old whose death verdict is too tragic for me to repeat here. Of course my one sentence summary is only the backbone of what appeared to involve a decent dose of planning and quite a few individuals - arrests continue to date. For information purposes, I do link articles at the end of the post - but my point is not to provide with a factual reportage. Instead it is my outright condemnation and frustration what I want to share here.

It is my belief that those most involved in sports issues in Greece were long aware of such and similar issues occurring and had opted, in what is a very "greek way" of dealing with things, not to do anything or do very little. Tragic as it is and horrendous as it may sound it comes as no surprise to anyone really, even to ordinary people like myself, that such incident did occur; not a single football (=soccer) match between the two major teams has been spared from violence or threats thereof... what has only varied is the degree. And while I do not want to give the picture that people persistently die, hooliganism, and to be precise, violent behavior between members of opposing teams, is yet another modern disease sadly not confined within the borders of the small south European state.

To be sure, responsibility lies among many people. It includes, of course, those in the industry, those in "the politics of sports", and those that have been assigned jobs directly relating to sports, in the government or the various agencies and secretariats. It of course involves the "fan clubs". But it goes well beyond that. It touches upon the media and the culture of conflict (not to say violence) they propagate; has any reporter/journalist ever really wondered about the consequences of his/her word choice? When the most popular description of an Olympiakos/Panathinaikos game is that of an encounter between "THE perennial rivals" ("το ντέρμπι των αιωνίων") there is something wrong and someone to blame too. One can go as far as to argue that all ordinary citizens who refuse to go to the games are responsible too: their contempt for the state of Greek sports contributes nothing really towards a solution.

But I wish not to go the full distance. Nor do I wish to undertake a study of who is to blame and how much. Policing is not what I have chosen to do for life. And inasmuch as I cannot let go of the news because I am concerned with what happens in Athens too, I do not think that I would ever do a full length post of this incident and the folly that has been cursing people - because after all the full responsibility goes to those narrow minded individuals thinking in this paranoid way. Not because it is not an important matter: certainly it is. It just so happens that a thousand other things are happening too at the same time which merit my/our attention: in my scribbles I read about how the value of life of Indian children has "depreciated" and how the peaceful citizens of the Solomon islands woke up to a tsunami that wrecked their lives. But there has been one thought in my mind since March 29 and this is what has spurred all this: "if we condemn fighting and killing even when this occurs for a loaf of bread, how much less tolerant can we be of such a killing that occurred not in the name of survival or of a God but in the name of a product of a man-made, drug-influenced and money-making business?"

Links

στα ελληνικά:Οργανωμένο σχέδιο πίσω από το «ραντεβού του θανάτου»

in English: All Greek team sports suspended after death in volleyball riots

No, not again.

If there is anything worse about violence and ensuing beatings and killings then this only alternative can be that children are involved. Logically, one's mind goes to the numerous children that are maltreated by parents or strangers alike; the vulnerability of children makes it a duty for society to cater for and protect them. What happens though when children are no longer only victims but become perpetrators too?

Today in France two young teenagers, a boy and girl, killed their classmate in the school courtyard. A few days ago, a young boy of no more than 11 years was caught in Salonica, Greece throwing stones at policemen. Last year, in the town of Veroia, Greece a boy was allegedly tortured and killed by his classmates. Just a few years ago, in Columbine, Ohio, a young boy shot and killed his classmates.

Language deprived of sensationalism can make even the most shocking information appear normal. Yet no matter how objective and relaxed the language is, such news is disturbing, even to the most calm and composed individuals. Denial is a common response: one sees it in newspapers analyses, listens to it when people talk, expresses it on his own face. "It is not possible."

Sadly it is. Atrocities occur. Atrocities occur often. Atrocities occur often in many places. Can it go any worse?

Realizing the unrealizable is an obligation. Accepting what is unacceptable is a crime.

Society advances by the day. Is this a measure of our progress? Or is it perhaps a measure of our civility? What is it really that justifies our breeding of violence such that brings horrendous crimes like the ones we read in the papers to life? We talk about education and curricula reforms, we are concerned about what happens in school classrooms when we pay little if any attention to all the 'other' teachers of children: the movies, the games, the advertisements, the media, the archetypes. In her article in yesterday's Kathimerini, Tasoula Karaiskaki condemns society and the culture of abundance that breeds inequality and cultivates disdain to those least favored by society. Explanations there can be many. The question remains, and is poignant one: how do we go about? What sort of revolution it takes, if any, such that would liberate us all from the maze of the 'culture of violence'?

To me in this story there are two other things that are problematic too. Karaiskaki brings the first in her article: democracy, and the inherent inability of our political system to treat all those members of society, and particularly the younger ones, that are deviating. More often than note the society turns its face down to those mostly in need. While sure there are exceptions the fact that incidents occur repeatedly is a sign of our utter failure.

The second concern involves justice. How is it that we can administer justice when there are no fingerprints of the true perpetrators? (Let us not forget that children committing crimes are themselves victims). And, perhaps most importantly, what is that prevents us from doing so? It seems to me that our conception of crime being limited to traditional or almost stereotypical images of criminals as depicted in movies does little service to us in times when the definitions of villain and victim have expanded so drastically.

With the violence of children being such common phenomenon surely we must admit that another pillar of society has collapsed. In front of our eyes. The least we can do: try to pick up the pieces.

Maybe, maybe, one day we can have the full wall up.

References and Links:

Meaux : les deux collégiens mis en examen

Η ευημερία που πληγώνει