Recent Posts
Surveying the Electoral Scene Part One
Posted by: scaccjm04
0 Comments
Filed in: Uncategorized
While I will be the first to acknowledge that getting the views of average American citizens doesn’t necessarily qualify as “across the pond” material, it is nonetheless interesting to travel and hear what other Americans in different parts of the country are observing regarding the election. At the beginning of March 2008, I embarked with the choir on a 10 day tour of the South traveling through Cincinnati, Nashville, Athens, Raleigh, Richmond, Washington DC/Gaithersburg, and Hagerstown. During our stays, I naturally chatted up my home stays about the upcoming election and found some interesting views rivers, mountains, and political boundaries away from central Pennsylvania.
My first major political conversation occurred in the Cincinnati home of the church pastor whose congregation we sang for. It was the weekend before the Ohio and Texas primaries so we were at ground zero of pre-election activities. The pastor explained that the next day former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was to be up the street conducting an event for Senator Hillary Clinton. I asked him about his congregation, about Cincinnati, and Ohio politics in general. He said he expected Senator Barack Obama to win Ohio (which he did not) and then explained that his church had a predominantly liberal congregation who was heavily leaning toward the Illinois Senator. This made sense in the context of a big, urban center where urban renewal was a huge issue and the church was conducting the type of organizing that Obama had done before he became a political leader.
Hillary Clinton won Ohio handily, however, the pastor was partly correct about Cincinnati- Obama carried Hamilton County (home to Cincinnati) by over 30,000 votes or approximately 20%. Clinton’s strength in the rural areas propelled her to a solid ten point victory over Obama, setting the stage for prognostication regarding the upcoming Pennsylvania primary.
Our next stop was Nashville where I stayed in the home of Jack and Charlotte, the quintessential southern couple. Jack, a staunch Republican, has not been able to vote Republican lately for many reasons. His concerns regarding the economy highlighted the growing concerns of small business owners (he owned a furniture business) and average people about Republican economic policies and how they will impact the upcoming election. Charlotte was a Democrat as evidenced by the stickers and signs she had on a cork board in their house. A former school teacher, her bulletin board contained the left overs of Gore/Lieberman memorabilia and a “W” with a slash through it. As a quick note - when Jack and Charlotte found out that myself and my two roommates were “of one mind” (aka Republicans), Charlotte jokingly wanted Jack to throw us out of the car.
Jack and Charlotte explained that they are supporting Barack Obama, an interesting statement for a couple that lives in a conservative, southern state that voted for Hillary Clinton in the Super Tuesday Democratic primary. However, once again Obama won Davidson County (home to Nashville) by a healthy 21 percentage points while Clinton carried the rest of the state. Jack said that it would send an important message to the rest of the world by electing an African American leader after the “damage” done by the Bush administration. It was interesting how he took the views on his choice and couched them in the idea of what the rest of the world will view by this election. This is another reason why I am including these comments on this blog.
For the rest of tour, political talk with our home stays was rather scarce and it gave me time to reflect upon the statements people were saying. First, I kept on thinking “What is it about Barack Obama?” Secondly, I realized that it is not just Obama that is captivating the attention of a nation, but the idea he represents - change. Regardless of what the candidates say, all elections are about change and the three remaining candidates John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama signify a significant change from Bush’s policies. Thinking for the rest of the trip, I wanted to convey to people that one candidate does not have ownership over the “change” idea, but all represent different aspects of change from the current administration. The key will be finding the change that is appropriate and suitable for the American people. At this point, I am not ready to believe that one candidate will be better at creating change than any other.
Election 2008: “A Mark in Our Country’s History”
Posted by: scaccjm04
Filed in: Uncategorized
By Rachel Kern
I began a journey a little over 6 months ago and found myself in a land of far off places and ancient temples waiting for their secrets to be reveled. I remember as a child listening to my father’s stories about his travels throughout Europe and praying every night that someday I would get to see the world. Six months ago I got to do better than see the world. I became a global citizen. I studied abroad and lived in Athens, Greece. It is my opinion that a person can never fully appreciate the world until they have lived in it; not just in one place their whole life but have really lived throughout the world. Becoming a global citizen brings a whole new meaning to the word home and I learned so much from being placed in a country where I was forced to flip my life upside down and reexamine it for what it truly is. It was Greece that taught me many lessons and changed my view of America.
Greece is a nation filled with people who are proud of their country and who have a patriotic love that I have never experienced before. My first taste of this pride was shortly after I arrived on her fair soils. Greece was going through an election. I didn’t know it at the time and found myself rather annoyed at the constant beeping of cars as they drove up and down my street. Finally my roommates and I left our apartment because we couldn’t sleep from the noise and decided to walk around. We found a restaurant and were having a few drinks when we noticed that playing on the TV was news coverage from the main square in Athens, Syntagma Square. Living rather close to the square we decided to walk down and see what all the fuss was about. It was an amazing site. People young and old waving flags and cheering, watching as the votes came in and were counted on large screens. There were firecrackers going off and people singing and chanting. My eyes grew wide as I watched the pride with which these people supported their candidates. I had never witnessed this in the United States. Unfortunately a lot of the young people I know could care less about their government and the decisions being made. They have a lot of opinions but fail to come to the polls on election days. But here in front of me there were young adults cheering and supporting their countrymen. Someone handed me a flag and I just smiled; not knowing any Greek I remained silent for the short amount of time that I was there and then feeling as if I were intruding upon some sacred ritual I quietly left with the rest of the American students. There is a pride in Greece and yet it’s not arrogance. It is hard to describe and it can only be assumed that it exists because of all the trials Greece has had to overcome. Greece has had a long road to independence and is still just now getting back on her feet.
Unlike the United States, Greece has a 5 party parliament. The race in the 2007 elections was between the New Democracy led by Kostas Karamanlis and the PASOK (Panhellenic Socialist Movement) led by George Papandreou. In 1981 PASOK formed the first socialist government in Greece’s history, and subsequently ruled the country for most of the past 20 years. It runs under the motto “National Independence, Popular Sovereignty, Social Emancipation, Democratic Process.” These words were emblazoned on flags and posters in Greek of course all over Syntagma Square that night. Along with another set of words, Néa Dimokratía, New Democracy whose ideology is “radical liberalism”. The New Democracy won by a narrow margin. This party is one of liberal conservatism and PASOK has social democracy ideals. For many days after the election my Greek professors and classmates could talk of nothing else. Karamanlis had won. He had been in power since the previous election and was up for election in 2007 and polls up till the fires that scorched the Peloponnese had Karamanlis losing to Papandreou. It seemed Greece was ready to go back to a socialist way of thinking. They had had enough liberal ideals. The fires caused a new spark to ignite in Karamanlis and after he addressed his nation after the tragedy of the Peloponnese the polls flip-flopped and New Democracy was once again back in demand. If I were a politics major, I would love to compare the fire tragedy of Greece to 9/11. George Bush was up for reelection the same as Karamanlis. I’m sure there would be some interesting correlations to be discovered. What I do know is that a country that cares that much and that passionately about their leadership will survive.
I want that for America. I want to see that drive to be involved that struggle to persuade and fight for your belief. I saw that on the faces of the proud citizens I witnessed cheering at Syntagma. Witnessing this inspired me to go home and become even more active in my government and to try to have more pride in my country and to encourage my friends to do the same. The election of 2008 will be a mark in our country’s history. I’m living it. It’s exciting. I try to follow election coverage as much as possible. To keep myself engrossed in what is going on with all parties and candidates. This is how international politics impacted my perspective of my own country’s politics.
Rachel Kern ‘09 spent the fall of 2007 studying in Greece. She has a POE in Marketing and Communication and is a contributor to this blog. The pictures included were taken during her travels.
“It Was Hard to Escape the Nationality”
Posted by: scaccjm04
Filed in: Uncategorized
When I got on that Boeing in September 2007, I was nervous. I was leaving behind comfort and security and replacing it with the unknown. Of course, I had my concerns. What was I going to do without my parents being a phone call away? How would I handle not being able to eat peanut butter in the way I know it in the states? What if I don’t fit in? All natural concerns which ended up being the easier parts of my abroad experience. What I did not anticipate is how much American politics were going to affect the friendships I made (and in some cases, didn’t make).
American politics fill the conversations of cafes and pubs alike across the ocean, and I have more stories than I can count of exchanges. We hiked the coast of Ireland with some of the new international students, and the first question a German student asked me was who I was voting for — not my name, my major, my interests, my family life. The aspects of a person which are fundamental to their identity were not at the forefront of his interest. It was my political affiliation. Considering it was the first time I spoke with him, I didn’t want my feelings on politics to sway his opinion of me.
So, what did I do? I went for the low blow, the easy target. I said George Bush was not America’s finest president (although some stronger words may have been used) and immediately, we were on the same page. We discussed our thoughts on Iraq, the new candidates, and what the future would hold for the United States and the rest of the world after the 2008 election.
Although this German later became one of my best friends, his first impression of me was an alarming one. I thought I could go abroad to get away from my culture and see another one; however, I was back in the limelight. People wanted to know what Americans thought and it was hard to escape the nationality. I found myself buying different shoes and jeans to blend in because the questions were exhausting.
Most international students approached politics the way my German friend did. There was sincere interest and concern for the future of American politics and what the plan was for the United States. Their interests were centered around change and progress, moving forward and getting out of the hole we currently seem to be in. Although this was how most international students responded, there were outliers which were challenging to deal with at first, but I think have changed me for the better in the end.
At a pub one night, I was not served a drink because I was American. The man swore at me, called me a murderer, and said he did not want “my kind” there. At first I shrugged it off, but it was heartbreaking. Me? A murderer? The same person who cried when her hamster died after 2 years? I couldn’t believe it. I couldn’t believe that American politics had become my identity. I was no longer Jen Barry, future children’s librarian with a mean jump shot. I was American and all the connotations that came with it. The things that I stood for became what my country stood for, and the decisions the government makes for over 300 million people had become my wrongdoing.
As I said before, this example is an outlier. Most of the students were simply interested about our positions. Occasionally, comments would be made both directly and indirectly like the incident in the pub but for the most part, the world just wanted to know: What is America going to do? But even more interestingly, the focus was on what WE (the American students) were going to do. Going abroad definitely confirmed the importance of individual responsibility — the fact that my vote matters, that my opinions matter, and that one person can in fact make a difference.
Jen Barry ‘09 studied at The University of Ulster in Northern Ireland in the Fall of 2007. She has a POE in English and Communication and is a contributor to this blog. The pictures included were taken by Jen in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
Financial Times: McCain Would Pursue “Pyromaniac Policies”
Posted by: scaccjm04
Filed in: Uncategorized
Why we should fear a McCain presidency
By Anatol Lieven
Published: March 24 2008 19:12 | Last updated: March 25 2008 16:27
It may seem incredible to say this, given past experience, but a few years from now Europe and the world could be looking back at the Bush administration with nostalgia. This possibility will arise if the US elects Senator John McCain as president in November.
Over the years the US has inserted itself into potential flashpoints in different parts of the world. The Republican party is now about to put forward a natural incendiary as the man to deal with those flashpoints.
The problem that Mr McCain poses stems from his ideology, his policies and above all his personality. His ideology, like that of his chief advisers, is neo-conservative. In the past, Mr McCain was considered to be an old-style conservative realist. Today, the role of the realists on his team is merely decorative.
Driven in part by his intense commitment to the Iraq war, Mr McCain has relied more on neo-conservatives such as his close friend William Kristol, the Weekly Standard editor. His chief foreign policy adviser is Randy Scheunemann, another leading neo-conservative and a founder of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Mr McCain shares their belief in what Mr Kristol has called “national greatness conservatism”. In 1999, Mr McCain declared: “The US is the indispensable nation because we have proven to be the greatest force for good in human history. We have every intention of continuing to use our primacy in world affairs for humanity’s benefit.”
Mr McCain’s promises, during last week’s visit to London, to listen more to America’s European allies, need to be taken with a giant pinch of salt. There is, in fact, no evidence that he would be prepared to alter any important US policy at Europe’s request.
Reflecting the neo-conservative programme of spreading democracy by force, Mr McCain declared in 2000: “I’d institute a policy that I call ‘rogue state rollback’. I would arm, train, equip, both from without and from within, forces that would eventually overthrow the governments and install free and democratically elected governments.” Mr McCain advocates attacking Iran if necessary in order to prevent it developing nuclear weapons, and last year was filmed singing “Bomb, bomb Iran” to the tune of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann”.
Mr McCain suffers from more than the usual degree of US establishment hatred of Russia, coupled with a particular degree of sympathy for Georgia and the restoration of Georgian rule over Abkhazia and South Ossetia. He advocates the expulsion of Russia from the Group of Eight leading industrialised nations and, like Mr Scheunemann, is a strong supporter of early Nato membership for Georgia and Ukraine. Mr Scheunemann has accused even Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, of “appeasement” of Russia. Nato expansion exemplifies the potential of a McCain presidency. Apart from the threat of Russian reprisals, if the Georgians thought that in a war they could rely on US support, they might be tempted to start one. A McCain presidency would give them good reason to have faith in US support.
Mr McCain’s policies would not be so worrying were it not for his notorious quickness to fury in the face of perceived insults to himself or his country. Even Thad Cochran, a fellow Republican senator, has said: “I certainly know no other president since I’ve been here who’s had a temperament like that.”
For all his bellicosity, President George W. Bush has known how to deal cautiously and diplomatically with China and even Russia. Could we rely on Mr McCain to do the same?
Mr McCain exemplifies “Jacksonian nationalism” – after Andrew Jackson, the 19th-century Indian-fighter and president – and the Scots-Irish military tradition from which both men sprung. As Mr McCain’s superb courage in North Vietnamese captivity and his honourable opposition to torture by US forces demonstrate, he also possesses the virtues of that tradition. Then again, some of the greatest catastrophes of the 20th century were caused by brave, honourable men with a passionate sense of national mission.
Not just US voters, but European governments, should use the next nine months to ponder the consequences if Mr McCain is elected and how they could either prevent a McCain administration from pursuing pyromaniac policies or, if necessary, protect Europe from the ensuing conflagrations.
The writer is a professor at King’s College, London, and a senior fellow of the New America Foundation. His book, America Right or Wrong, analyses US nationalism
The Financial Times Limited 2008
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1a47e1ac-f9b0-11dc-9b7c-000077b07658.html
Inauguration Day
Posted by: scaccjm04
Filed in: Uncategorized
It is a weird twist of fate when someone who has never studied abroad creates a blog regarding international perspectives on the 2008 presidential election. What is convenient is that Juniata has so many students who have and are currently across the ponds. This blog will be a chance to hear first hand accounts of what international citizens think of the American electoral process and in particular, the current presidential campaign. Since I have been lucky enough to go abroad with the Juniata College Concert Choir on several occasions (though for very brief periods of time), I will offer my keen insight on some international observations, but will stick to mainly domestic rantings on the speeches, events, and faux pas of the candidates. In the mean time if any readers feel a need to talk about their international experiences arguing over McCain and some Irish Guinness or Obama and some home-made Italian spaghetti, feel free to contact me at scaccjm04@juniata.edu and I will post your experiences.