Veronica:Apathy

The biggest part of this chapter that stood out to me was the Rock the Vote Campaign. A campagin that was put together to protest against sensorship and encourages youth to vote and have a say in their future and the laws that affect them. Youth are considered to be politically inactive unless it is in a extreme matter such as lyrics or protests. Yet that is political activism. The fact that the youth of today are writing songs, or painting pictures or protesting in ways that are considered extreme it is still getting attention. Isn't that the whole point of activism? To gain attention or make public a topic. Any coverage is good coverage when it comes to political activism. Whether it is negative or positive because the whole point is to raise awareness and by coverage that goal is attained. I feel the youth of today are more active due to the simple fact that they were told they'd never see a woman or african american run or be in office in our lifetime. Yet, here we are. To see celebrities and role models speak up on how important voting and getting information and getting involved is, opens the eyes of the youth to want to be involved, reasearch what is going on and participate.

Veronica: Fragmentation

I think it is important that the public sphere include the input and opinion of every person no matter what their backround they come from. That is the only way to create a well rounded view point of opinion on a topic. To obtain any real understanding of any topic one has to explore all realms or sub-categories in that topic. Otherwise i feel an opinon can be bias to one's experiences or morals without allowing themselves to see a full picture. Without the input of people from all walks of life then the public sphere wouldn't and couldn't be called the "public sphere" because it closes off parts of the public.

Veronica: Trivilization

Gender roles in movies are always very typical. The male is always the strong heroic character while the woman is always in distress and needs saving in the end. In watching " Terminator" the female is portrayed as a strong individual who is trying to save her son. She fights against these inconcievable machines who are violent. She embodies this typical male character who is brave and courageous and strong whether it be minded or physically. Yet what really throws off her character role is in the end she is placd in a mental institution while trying to reveal that she was fighting machines who were trying to kill her son and take over. So inevitable the way I see it she was thrown back into the damsel in distress role by being placed in a mental institution. Heaven forbid a woman ever be depicted as a strong, courageous, brave character throughout a story to the end.

Veronica: Flyvjerg

I agree with Habermas. I feel that through discussion that a consensus can be reached on any topic. It doesn't matter what the topic is whether it be abortion or racism to politics, if people are open and willing to hear other sides or stories and take it in and come to a mutual agreement on things then a consensus can be met. But it is unreachable if people are unwilling to discuss a topic to begin with. Flyvjerg feels Habermas is about consensus while Foucault is about conflict and power. I feel through this class I realized I am more Habermasian than Foucaultian. When in the beginning i felt the opposite.

Davey Neubauer: Apathy

the modernist viewpoint is that young people are apathetic tworads "real" political concerns and that protests and rallies "only fail to change the world... seem to be not only misguided but actively dangerous" (184). Modernists in my opinion seem to think that that change is always a bad thing for if these new "internet" outlets are being used instead of the traditional ways of media than this is proof that this alternative way to participate in politics is not valid. How can this be? Just because the youth of today are engaging in political debates in different ways "zines" or other forms of online blogging doesn't mean that their points are any less valid. Who is someone to say my point matters and your point doesn't count because I am constructing my ideas in the traditional sense.

Jared on Apathy

McKee seems to support the legitimacy of today's youth's political approach. McKee says that the youth tend to unconventionally political and they respond more to cultural actions like political protests than to direct political action. Lack of direct political actions would go against modernist theory.

I agree with McKee's assertion that today's youth are political in a different way. I think that it's more important to be pro-active in changing the philosophies of citizens than to be pro-active with direct political actions. In order for change to come, I think there's has to be a transformation in thinking. If the people support a principle, it will become a legislated policy.

However, I think there is a minor snag in the cultural political pattern of thinking. I think a result of modern patterns of politics fosters a general consensus of uninformed citizens. It's definitely more important to change your way of thinking, but if we wait for political information to make it to us via bumper stickers and monumental political events, then we'll only be knowledgeable on the biggest of events, which are only a small percentage of a political occurrences.

From Lorraine: Apathy

Sorry I'm late getting this in...anywho, I think a huge part of apathy--especially political apathy--is the fact that young people don't trust too many people over 30--especially if those people happen to be politicians. The reason young people trust musicians is the fact that musicians haven't necessarily tried to screw them out of their futures and have had a more positive impact than the politicians who have the budgets for education and have cut of social welfare projects from them, such as Head Start and free lunch and have forced their parents to spend most of their days at work, leaving them with little to no supervision and guidance. Beyond that, unless you're of voting age, you have no say in what goes on in the country you live in, and because you can't vote, no one really cares what you have to say.

Let's face it: The government is no longer of, by, and for the people. It of, by, and for the elite to use as their own piggy banks. Young people know this, and that's why they're apathetic.