Are all politics local? Reflection on activism.

As globalization progresses farther and farther, localization matters less. Though localization will always have an impact on identity, as communication and travel become easier, location will not matter as much. Already the definition of local has changed, with developments such as the European union, and united nations it wouldn't be crazy to identify with a larger group, other than a country. It may seem a little corny to say, we could all be citizens of the world, but that is the direction the political systems are heading. Organizations Like the UN create rules many cultures all agree on, this allows for peoples of different cultures to identify together. With common Identity common politics should follow. If politics can be more encompassing less conflicts could follow. This is because there is more to bind country's together than Pitt them against each other. I think globalization is a natural trend, that will likely occur despite protests or resistance, and hopefully will be a political change for good.

My Political Identity

"Others"

I have always prided myself on my Identity. It never mattered how ruff things got, bad grades, played a bad game, social standing, discomfort, anything at all, I always found comfort in my Identity. This concept of my Identity came into being when I found Hero's. Form about 13 years old till today my three hero's and largest contributors of my Identity have been, Indiana Jones, James Bond, and the most interesting man in the world (from dos equis commercials). Its never bothered me that they are all fictitious, and one is from a beer commercial, They where important to me. You probably read this an laugh, as I do at myself, but I have tried to live my life, to the best of my ability, in the vain of these fictional characters.


My hero' are important because when asked who I regard as "others" or the opposite of my Identity, the first thing I thought of where my three hero. Mainly because that's always my starting point of self examination. I realized that I am members of many groups of people, I am on the Swim team, I am in Kappa Sigma, I go to Dickinson College. However when asked what group I Identify with I would never say I am a Swimmer, Frat Star, or College student. The group I would Identify with is a small group of friends some, just acquaintances, who represent living characteristics of my Hero's. That being said
I suppose I identify with the small group of people Ive meet whom I admire, and my "others" I use to gauge myself is everyone else.

Everything I do I do because of my Identity. I think its a huge factor in every persons life, this is why I am so interested in the "IR theory" Identity perspective. Not everyone Identify;s as I do, many see themselves as, Americans, Arabs, Christians, Athletes, Muslims, Race car drivers ect. ect. What interests me is how a large common Identity effects state decisions. Even though I fancy myself a British spy, I also identify as an American. In many ways consciously or unconsciously, I would probably make decisions like an American to. Dose this mean Barack Obama makes his decision Identifying as an American, as an African American, or some unknown personal hero, or none of the above. What about Assad, Dose his Identity as a minority in his country play a role in his decision making. Honestly I don't know. Questions about decision making are always hypothetical. What dose all this mean? I'm not really sure but its all very interesting.

Discussion

I just came back from a group discussion of various experts on the Syria situation.  This discussion above all else highlighted how chaotic the world of international relations is. The major facts on Syria I had, for the most part known, but the perspective where new and enlightening for me. For example, I thought the similarity's in the US military view, and Israeli view to be interesting. Both while acknowledging the moral, and political situation put little stock in ether. It was all about the red line. Syria has crossed over that red line and now US deterrence and defense is at risk in the form of credibility. It seems from this discussion that action must be and will be taken. The decision of president Obama to consult congress was also very interesting. It seems if congress agrees that it provides a safety blanket for decision makers, as well as showing the world a shining example of democracy in action. However if it dose not work I feel it risks undermining our government as action in Syria will likely happen ether way. In short I think asking congress is a good idea if congress agrees, but a bad idea if they don't because action is required to sustain our credibility. This discussion showed me how lawless the international community can be, and in a lawless community you are only as good as your word. Unfortunately this concept has put the US in a precarious position.