Postponing the funeral

Ok… so I have one year left of college.

Which fucking sucks. I love college like craaazy. I would stay 10 more years if I could. But I can’t afford to. So I am graduating a year early.

The original plan was to go straight to law school.

However, in recent months I have begun to refer to my impending graduation as if it were my death.

So I’ve decided, fuck it. Fuck law school. I’m too young to die.

I’ve decided to pursue teaching english as a second language abroad. NO, this isn’t a career move. I’m not doing it so that it will look good on a resume.. Im doing this because I want an adventure. I’m graduating college at 20 years old, for Chrissakes. There’s no rush!

I want to teach English in either Japan or South Korea. Or maybe China.

I originally planned on teaching in Mexico, Chile, or Argentina, but teachers only make around 500-800 dollars a month. Fuck that.

So yeah… I’m not going to lie. This decision is mostly an attempt by me to forestall law school.

Do I want to be a lawyer? Maybe. Will I go through with it? Probably.

Now? No.

I haven’t decided yet if I’m going to take the LSAT in september… I KNOW I’m not going to study if i’m not even applying for several years. So maybe I should just wait?

I might take a year off… I might take 3 or 4. I don’t know. But I know that right now I am not mature or committed enough to go through law school.

But that’s a year away! Before I start applying to teaching positions, I have a year to be a crazy shitshow. And I plan on making the most of it.

A Change of Pace

Ok, once again I’m changing the purpose of this blog. I’m going to be focusing more on the “personal blogging”… which means I won’t be advertising it any more. If anyone reads this I suppose that’s swell, but I really miss venting into this thing, so I’m going to go back to my self-centered posts revolving around my petty problems. =]

The whole world in your hands.

Ok, this little rant was inspired by the song In Your Hands by Charlie Winston. Both the song and artist are excellent, and the lyrics are thought-provoking. I’ll put the lyrics here for reference:

Mother,
I’ve gotta get out of here
So I can save our family
From this poverty
And when I make my money
I’ll send it back to you

Father,
Give me strength, I pray
I have to end this misery
It’s causing too much pain
I’m gonna look for richer lands
Where the money’s made

I’m gonna put my whole world
In your hands
I have to put my whole world
In your hands
In your hands

Mister,
Please let me work somehow
You’ve kept me waiting eighteen months
And still I’m not allowed
And everytime you promise me :
“Not much longer now “

I’ve to put my whole world
In your hands
You’ve got my whole world
In your hands
In your hands
Listen to me, listen to me

Mister,
Mr ! You say you’re trying
But don’t you know my brother’s dying
You say “It won’t be long”

But why am I so cursed
For where I am born ?

You’ve got my whole world
In your hands
I’ve had to put my whole world
In your hands
I’m gonna put my whole world
In your hands
I’ve had to put my whole world
In your hands
In your hands.

The song is about a desperately poor person who leaves everything he knows behind to find work in another country, in the hopes that he might make enough money to send some home to his struggling family. However, the man finds that huge obstacles are preventing him from finding work in the “richer land.”

In the United States it seems like a significant portion of the population views immigrants as blood-thirsty moochers who are trying to manipulate the system to cheat Americans out of their money. Xenophobic hysteria is so ridiculous in some places that politicians are honestly considering the construction of a literal wall along the US-Mexico border. They claim that a tidal wave of immigrants is threatening the American way of life.

Beyond the obvious stupidity of this exaggerated paranoia, as far as I’m concerned, its Un-American. The inscription on the Statue of Liberty on Ellis Island pretty much sums up my perception of America:

Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

America has always been a place of hope and refuge for the world’s desperate. That’s how this country started, and throughout its history that has continued to be the American identity abroad. Even for me, a white male who is today perceived as the standard “American”, none of my family members were in this country 100 years ago. They all came to this country looking for what they couldn’t achieve in their homeland; Jewish, Scottish, Italian, and Mexican immigrants, driven out of their country in desperate circumstances and taking a chance on the American Dream. THAT is what America is, and the people who use their patriotism to justify their xenophobia, racism, and bigotry are either ignorant, hypocritical, or both.

Some argue that there is a point when we have to stop allowing people in to make sure America continues to be a place of prosperity. Again, its a pretty weak excuse. Even in an “economic crisis,” the United States is a place of wealth and riches in comparison to much of the world. Yes, we have our problems which need to be resolved- but that doesn’t make it ok to stop accepting the world’s “huddled masses.” We can all trace our history back to one of the many waves of immigrants to come to this country, and by closing the door behind us, we’re defiling the American Dream that our ancestors benefited from so much.

If someone were starving to death on your doorstep, you would be morally responsible to help that person, right? How is this any different? Just because we can’t SEE the people who need us doesn’t mean that they aren’t there. Our selfish votes at the ballot box, our willful blindness, and our apathy are blameworthy. The United States’ anti-immigrant policies are tearing families apart, making criminals out of the well-intentioned, killing the desperate, and desecrating the values that make America what it is.

An immigrant (legal or otherwise) isn’t a national security threat. Nor is an immigrant a number or statistic. An immigrant is a HUMAN BEING, and when they come to this country in need, they’ve put their “whole world in our hands,” as the song goes. When we forget that, we also forget the very meaning of the American Dream. This country is supposed to be a melting pot (or a fruit salad, as USC’s Professor Ange-Marie Hancock would say… take her, she’s amazing… also, I  stole the term “willful blindness” from her).

If you haven’t seen it already, I definitely recommend La Misma Luna. Its a great movie (featuring USC alumna America Ferrera, of Ugly Betty fame), and it really puts the United States’ immigration policies into perspective.

=]

40 Years After Stonewall

I think sometimes we forget just how good we have it.

Half a century ago, homosexuals were classified as subversives by the US Department of State; we were officially recognized as security risks to the country. The FBI kept lists of known homosexuals, as did the US Postal Service. The names of people arrested for public indecency and lewd behavior (ie, two men holding hands, women wearing suits) were published regularly in newspapers. Being queer was officially recognized as a psychopathic condition, and was a valid reason to be fired from your job. The number of gay men and women forced out of the military and government positions was in the thousands each year. If gay people regularly congregated together, the police department’s “Public Morals Squad” would be called in to intervene. Police brutality was commonplace. Hope for the future was pretty bleak; there were no substantial gay rights organizations. The only real “community” gay people had was in underground establishments, often maintained with help from criminal organizations like the Mafia, or by bribing the police.

Exactly 40 years ago today, things began to change. Prompted by one feisty lesbian’s shout of “Why don’t you guys DO something?”, queer people fought back (literally) against institutionalized discrimination and cultural genocide.

At Stonewall, a Mafia-run gay dance club and bar, police had barricaded the gay clientele inside so that their names could be collected and distributed to the local newspapers. Those who were drinking were arrested, and anyone dressing as a woman (including those who actually were women) were forced to prove their gender by removing their clothes. Anyone seen cross-dressing was also arrested. Reportedly, police brutally assaulted a number of the bar’s patrons, including sexually harassing butch lesbians. Eventually, as some men and women were allowed to leave, a crowd gathered outside the bar. When one lesbian was dragged out of the club, police hitting her to try to force her into a caged car filled with cuffed gays, she shouted at the crowd of hundreds to do something… this prompted what we now refer to as the Stonewall Riots, and marked the beginning of the American Gay Rights Movement.

A LOT has changed since Stonewall. First of all, I NEVER would have come out if I lived in a society as violent towards gays as did the people in the 1960s and 1970s… we now live in a culture where many people feel they can safely express their true identity. I haven’t been hit by a police officer to date (unless my Dad counts), and gay people have almost the same rights as straight people in the workplace. With a few exceptions, I am no longer considered a threat to US national security, and there are so many gay organizations that I can’t possibly participate in as many as I would like.

Not enough credit is given to the brave queer pioneers who stood up to mainstream society when it was intent on stamping out the perversion of non-heterosexual identities. People like Evelyn Hooker, the founders of the Mattachine Society, and later leaders like Harvey Milk are underappreciated for the contribution they’ve made to our world. We have a tendency to take our liberties for granted, as if they were ours all along. Its way too easy to forget that just a generation ago people risked their lives and livelihoods in order to make the advances toward equality that we enjoy today.

The idea that the gay rights movement can now declare victory is a bunch of bullshit.

The list of rights that are still not granted to our community is substantial. Defense of Marriage Act, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, ENDA, hate crimes legislation… those are just the high profile ones. We still have a long way to go; cleansing the imbedded discrimination from US laws is going to be a long process. And institutionalized discrimination is just the beginning… changing laws are one thing, but changing society is another. Its very easy to board ourselves up in WeHo or Castro and pretend that everything is glittery goodness, but it’s a lie… we shouldn’t have to live at the sidelines of mainstream society just to feel accepted.

Maybe our generation of queers needs a hero? Maybe we need a lezzie in handcuffs encouraging us to “DO something,” or a young politician trying to “recruit” us? But honestly, I’d like to think we could each individually, both gay and straight, take responsibility for the wellbeing of our own society. The temptation of apathy shouldn’t be so strong that it stifles a movement that is still very much in its infancy. A lot has been done in 40 years, but that doesn’t mean that America has reached its full potential.

And you know what? There is a world beyond American borders where there is no such thing as a “gay community,” and gay rights are just a strange and vague pipedream. There are still plenty of places in the world where gays are regularly executed, where little queer boys and girls wonder what’s wrong with them, and if they’re the only ones… and we think our job is done?

Nope.

Michael Jackson: My Top Ten

Ok, so I’ve been watching the Michael Jackson tributes on TV since he died (because it all that’s on), and so I thought I’d compile by own list of my favorite Jackson songs.

1. You Are Not Alone

This one’s pretty perfect for the occasion. Listen to the lyrics and you’ll know what I mean.

2. Billy Jean

We were at a bar last night when this song came on, and as soon as we heard it everyone started singing along. The video is totally badass (with the iconic light-up sidewalk). <3

3. Don’t Stop Til You Get Enough

Back when MJ was kinda cute.

4. Bad

When MJ was at his baddest.

5. Thriller

Best dance ever? Quite possibly.

6. Dirty Diana

This is about as hardcore as Michael ever got. =P

7. Beat It

MJ > Fallout Boy.

8. They Don’t Care About Us

Uh-oh, MJ’s pissed!

9. Will You Be There

This one totally brings me back to when I used to watch Free Willy over and over again with my little sis.

10. Smooth Criminal

…I kind of like the Alien Ant Farm version better. Shhhh

…RIP.

One of those moods. o.O

Yeah, so lately I’ve just been in this mood where I don’t want to see or talk to anyone.

That’s pretty rare for me… usually I like to be surrounded by people all the time.

Maybe its because I’ve been with the same small group of people for the last month, but right now all I want to do is crawl into a dark space, curl up, and sleep for the next week.

Its nothing personal about the people I’m with… most of them are really cool. I just need a little bit more VARIETY. Its like every day is this predictable repetition of the same people, same places, same lectures, same paper…

Plus, I’m honestly not in the happiest mood, and I really don’t feel like pretending to have a good time tonight.

Today, I just kind of wanted to disappear for a while.

But alas, people won’t give me my moment! I am being forced by gunpoint to go drunk bowling.

And I’m afraid if I refuse there might be some kind of intervention.

I can’t wait to go home.

Things I Have to Look Forward To:

• This EU course finally being over.
• Seeing my homos! Vickie, Marshall, Gen…. Jesus H. Christ, who would have thought I could become so codependent on these people in less than a year??
• Ma and Pa
• Cabo!
• Shopping with my leftover Brussels money. <3
• Moving into the TWICKLE HOUSE.
• Meeting our new dog Snick.

Things I’m Dreading

• The next week
• The flight home
• Studying for the LSAT, and then taking it.
• Going back to work.
• Starting my last year of college.

Fuck, puff, and croak.

Live and let live.

It’s a simple mantra really. I think people ought to be able to do whatever the hell they want, so long as it doesn’t impede on OTHER people’s right to do whatever the hell THEY want.

For instance… gay people should go ahead and be gay, because their being gay doesn’t prevent straight people from being straight.

Its not exactly the most complicated of theories.

However, it gets a little stickier when you think about victimless crimes.

Prostitution. Euthenasia. Recreational drug use. They’re all illegal, and yet there is no “victim” when the crime is committed.

Prostitution is, in the most simplistic of views, the exchange of a service for money.

Some people are good at math, so they become accountants. We pay accountants to do our taxes. Some people are good at cooking. We pay them to make us our dinner. No one seems to give a damn.

But what about the people that are good at fucking? For some reason that becomes an issue.

There are a lot of busty hoochies and well-endowed hunks who are unemployed right now. They could be contributing to our economy for chrissake! But the goodies and services they have to offer aren’t legal.

Or what about euthanasia?

My hair belongs to me. No one seems to give a shit what I do to my hair. I can braid it, dye it blue, or if I decide I don’t want it anymore, I can get rid of it.

But if its my LIFE, I don’t have the right to end it?

Some people want to die. They don’t want to KILL anybody else… they just decided they no longer want to live. Maybe its because they are in chronic pain, or they read too much existential literature and have decided life is meaningless… does it matter? Don’t they own their own lives? Why is it ok for Uncle Sam to tell someone that, no matter how much pain they are in, they don’t have the right to die? I don’t remember singing the rights to my life away. Its some BS.

I don’t know about you, but I find it a little offensive that the government doesn’t think we are intelligent enough to make our own decisions about what we do with our body or our life.

I would never prostitute myself or hire a prostitute. And, barring unexpected tragedies, I would never want to die. And I have too many goals in life to be taking hard drugs. But goddamn it, if someone else wants to, I say go for it! Its not MY place to tell someone how to live their own lives. So long as no one is being manipulated, coerced, or endangered, what the hell does it matter what people decide is right for them?

I honestly don’t think there’s a very good argument why these activities are criminal. Sure, people suggest problems like the spread of disease due to prostitution, or the elderly being manipulated to sign their life away in the interest of their family. But these issues have simple legal resolutions… and as far as I see it, the fact that I can’t do these things is an encroachment on my rights.

Of course, no politician would EVER seriously suggest changing any of these laws… its taboo, and frankly, its not really THAT big of a deal. But, in theory, I am totally in support of the sex workers, the safe drug users, and the people who want to die. No one should own your life but you.

In Kylelandia, you would be able to fuck, puff, and croak all you’d like. All you have to do is sign the strictly enforced No-Pants Law.

50 Hottest in the Capitol

Ok, so this is just about the most amazing thing I have ever found while listlessly exploring the interweb.

On theHill.com, there is an annual ranking of the sexiest federal employees.

I shit you not!

When you remove the women and the male Republicans, both of which I of course find entirely unstimulating, we are still left with a pretty amazing list of people.

Here are my top 4:

1)

Lovin that sweater!

2)

Oh my god. Men with guns are hot. And other people agree with me, cuz this guy was on the top 10.

3

CUTE! And he’s tall. Awesome?

4)

OK. This is the best idea I’ve ever heard.

This list was from 2008… I wonder when the new one comes out? Hopefully soon!

Here’s a link so you can pick your own favorites. =]

http://thehill.com/cover-stories/50-most-beautiful-people-on-capitol-hill-2008—top-10-2008-07-29.html

Disclaimer: This is not my proudest moment in academia.

Evaluate the EU’s performance in its neighborhood. Is the ENP doomed to failure because it does not promise EU membership?

In 2004 the European Union added ten new countries to its list of member states. The incorporation of these countries was a turning point in EU relations with its neighboring states; as EU borders began to approach Russian territory, the formation of an “iron curtain” between EU member states and non-member states became a prominent topic of concern. Additionally, the EU was having difficulty integrating the new member states into the EU system; as more and more countries began expressing an interest in EU membership, decision-makers were forced to admit that the EU could not expand indefinitely without jeopardizing the stability of their union. In light of these realities, the EU devised a policy that would balance their desire to facilitate the greater integration of Europe with their need to protect the strength of the European Union: The European Neighborhood Policy. The ENP would encourage further integration of neighboring countries into the European system while stopping short of full membership. The four principle goals of the ENP would be to achieve political reform, economic reform, convergence of market regulations, and security cooperation with neighboring states.  By doing so, the EU could surround itself with friendly countries without creating the iron curtain of member states approaching the Russian border. Some have expressed doubts as to whether the EU can successfully promote its interests in its neighborhood without promising these states full membership. However, the promise of membership would actually be counter to the EU’s goals. The more subtle use of positive incentives and political leverage to affect change in the European neighborhood is the most prudent and advantageous means for the EU to continue European integration, and its decision not to promise membership to neighboring states strengthens, rather than weakens, the overall goals of the European Union.

Even without the promise of membership, the EU has a host of tools at its disposal to integrate neighboring states into the European system. The EU is able to isolate specific areas of integration that it is willing to offer nearby countries, while not necessarily guaranteeing complete incorporation into the EU system. As a global economic leader, access to the EU market is an appealing incentive to bordering states. For many, the opportunity to tap into the European consumer base is justification enough to make adjustments to their political or economic systems. In exchange for lowering or eliminating tariffs on incoming goods, the EU can negotiate the reforms it wishes to see in many of its European neighbors.  Alternatively, the EU’s can offer sectoral integration in areas such as transportation, energy, or technology; the lure of greater cooperation with the EU in these fields is a leverage factor in its relations with neighboring countries. Finally, the EU has an extensive foreign assistance program with its ENP partners. The EU can provide a number of services, from infrastructure development to civil administration, if neighboring states are willing to allow EU input into their political and economic governance. This tactic is used widely amongst ENP participating states, with particular attention and extra incentives provided to the most cooperative actors, such as Morocco or Ukraine. These tools of leverage employed by the EU are negotiated through an “Action Plan,” in which the EU enumerates which services it will provide the ENP participant, and under what conditions. The Action Plan, usually a general outline of the agreement, is accompanied by an array of bilateral agreements on specific issue areas. Once the Action Plan is agreed upon, the EU can guarantee the conditions are being met through regular “Progress Reports,” ensuring that both the EU and the neighboring state have fulfilled or are making progress towards the commitments they made in their bilateral Action Plan.  Choosing specific areas of integration, rather than offering complete membership, admittedly provides the EU with less political leverage; however, the EU has still made significant progress using this tactic. The influence of the EU in Palestine is one indicator of this. As will be explained, the benefits of promising EU membership are eclipsed by the high costs that continued EU expansion would entail.

A principle advantage of using the ENP approach is the establishment of a “ring of friends” surrounding the European Union, particularly on its Eastern boundaries.  As EU borders gradually approach Russian territory, the threat of growing tensions between the EU and Russia increases. For Russia, the fear of isolation is one of the central driving forces of its foreign policy; continual EU encroachment into Russia’s traditional sphere of influence would certainly be viewed as a threat to Russian national interests.  As such, the ENP offers a balance between two conflicting EU objectives: the continued expansion of EU influence and regional integration, in contrast with its need to maintain cooperative relations with Russia. The ENP allows the EU to work towards political and economic integration with regional partners, while avoiding the aggressive political statement of proclaiming that Russia’s neighbors are member states of the European Union. ENP participating states represent a blurring of EU boundaries, softening the harsh dividing line reminiscent of the Cold War ‘iron curtain.’  Because Russia is a major military power, the world’s largest country, the main provider of European gas and oil resources, and the country of origin of the EU’s largest minority group, the success of the EU-Russia relationship is a key priority for EU decision-makers.  The advantages of blurring the boundaries between European and Russian spheres of influence far outweigh the loss of political leverage the EU suffers by not expressly offering its neighboring states EU membership.

Beyond the geopolitical considerations of the EU-Russia relationship, sectoral integration through the ENP is the best means by which the EU can accomplish its regional goals without damaging the internal cohesion of the European Union. The reckless pursuit of membership for all of the EU’s neighboring countries would be disastrous for the overall functioning of the union. With each newly admitted country, the EU must expend time and resources to ensure that the state is properly integrated into the European system. This is a gradual and exhausting process; the EU is still struggling to digest the latest batch of countries to be incorporated.  This condition, which Karen Smith calls “enlargement fatigue,” was a central motivator for the creation of the ENP; the EU could not cope with any more new additions to the EU, and as such it developed a policy that would allow integration with neighboring partners in specific areas without having to afford each country complete membership.  The EU thus was able to individually tailor each neighboring state’s Action Plan in a way that increased cooperation while minimizing the cost of integration. For instance, in countries with poorly developed market economies, integration into the European economic system would be hugely expensive; instead, the EU could develop an Action Plan which focused on integration in other sectors, such as transportation or security. The ENP thus offers the EU a way to honor its normative and strategic commitments to European integration while simultaneously preserving the strength of its internal structures.

Finally, the ENP serves as a tool that extends the EU’s policies of integration to those countries not eligible for EU membership. While some of the states participating in the ENP could conceivably be accepted as member states in the future, others are entirely ineligible; the Southern neighbors, as they are not European, could never be part of the EU’s enlargement policy under current laws. Moreover, other ENP participants in the East are so far from meeting enlargement conditions that accession in the near future is entirely unlikely.  In the absence of the ENP, the EU’s leverage in these states would be negligible; the ENP allows the EU to affect internal changes in participating countries that would be inaccessible if the EU’s enlargement policy was the only strategy for European integration.  In this respect, the ENP is desirable not for its strength, but for its breadth; it can extend EU influence much further than the enlargement tool. At the same time, the use of the ENP in no way weakens the enlargement tool; while the ENP does not promise EU membership, nor does it forbid membership. The ENP thus increases the scope of EU integration while still affording eligible states the possibility of eventual EU membership.

Viewed in terms of mere leverage power, it may appear that the ENP is a less useful foreign policy instrument than EU enlargement. However, this view neglects many of the considerations which originally prompted the EU to develop the ENP. EU enlargement is an extremely costly process, and the EU’s resources are already stretched to accommodate the latest accessions to the Union. At the same time, enlargement has increased tensions with Russia in the Eastern neighborhood, creating instability in one of the EU’s most vital relationships. Finally, enlargement is only useful in countries which are conceivably eligible to become member states of the EU; for those countries not eligible, enlargement is a rather ineffective policy. The European Neighborhood Policy was developed specifically to help combat these issues in its regional policies. When the success of the ENP is measured with these factors in mind, the ENP has certainly performed the role intended by its creators. Through its neighborhood policy, the EU has both expanded its sphere of influence and facilitated the further integration of Europe. The benefits of this will continue to reveal themselves as the program grows and strengthens.

Works Cited
Cameron, Fraser (2007). An Introduction to European Foreign Policy. London, Routledge.
Casier, Tom. “The EU and Russia: Partners by Default?” Lecture: Institute for European Studies,     Vrije Universiteit Brussel. 25 June 2009.
Noutcheva, Gergana. “The European Union and Its Neighbours: Partners or Periphery?” Lecture:     Institute for European Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel. 23 June 2009.
Sakwa, Richard (2008). “‘New Cold War’ or Twenty Years’ Crisis? Russia and International     Politics.” International Affairs 84 (2): 241-267.
Smith, Karen (2005). “The Outsiders: The European Neighborhood Policy.” International     Affairs    81 (4): 757-773.

Should I feel bad about this?

Yeah. I know its stupid. And somehow, I get the impression there might be some distasteful jokes about gay people. But I kinda wanna see it anyway.

Is this against my values?

…do I HAVE values?

Not sure.

But anyways, I definitely want to see it.

And this might be a little awkward… but Borat is kinda hot.

Just sayin.

Anybody down to go to the movies when I get back to the states? =]