Reflections on 2013

As this year draws to an end, like so many others around the world, I feel the need to reflect over the previous 12 months in my life. 2013 was a year of accomplishment and extreme growth for me. From expanding business relationships to my personal relationships, I have changed in virtually every area. A close friend once told me that the person I was at 18 would be nothing like the person I was at 21 and that this process would continue all of my life. I didn’t believe her at the time, but as I’ve grown older, I’ve learned that each year her words become truer and truer. My current 23 year old self seems so distant and profoundly different than who I was five years ago. And five years from now, I’ll look back on these words and revel at how incredibly young-minded and naïve I am today. It’s a humbling and inspiring experience to know that I will (hopefully) continually change and mature until the day I leave this planet.

I realize that it’s pretty clichéd to write a post about reflecting on the previous year while simultaneously calling my former self a stranger, but that’s really the only accurate description I can give. Clichés may be overdone, but sometimes they are all that fit. 2013 has not been such an awesome year because of me, though; it has been 100% because of God. This year has been full of uncertainty, and it forced me to throw myself head first into my relationship with the Father. And though it’s a decision I must constantly renew, I have never once regretted or questioned putting my faith entirely in God.

Anyone who knows me knows that I have been given a passion for seeing an end to modern day slavery within my lifetime, and this passion has driven my thoughts and actions for a very long time. In April of this year, I was blessed with the fantastic opportunity of volunteering with a local non-profit organization which directly serves victims and survivors of human trafficking in Virginia. I work with such a dedicated, brilliant, steadfast, and compassionate group of people who are the definition of love personified. Each day I am reminded of how fortunate I am to know and interact with such noteworthy and motivating people.

My boyfriend also became my future husband this year, and we’re both anxiously and enthusiastically awaiting our wedding in mid-August 2014. All my life, my spiritual leaders warned me of the dangers of cohabiting with my significant other prior to marriage, and while I know our living situation isn’t pleasing to God, it has never once separated me from celebrating and loving my Father in Heaven. 2013 has had its ups and downs, but God has seen me through it all and he has remained a constant beacon of hope and strength.

I imagined adulthood would be terrible and awful and unenjoyable; but how incredibly wrong I was. Becoming an adult—while admittedly very terrifying—has been the most rewarding, exciting, and enthralling adventure of my life; and I am stoked to see where God will lead me in 2014 and in the years to come.

“Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert.” – Isaiah 43:18-19

This. So much this.

"Adoption feels like a gigantic knot to me. A huge balled up knot that is the complicated life of adoption, open adoption, two families, extended family from four sides, explaining which “mom” I'm talking about and emotions. Those damn emotions that still confound and confuse me decades later – you would think I would be accustomed to this life by now.

But I’m not.

It’s unpredictable not only in the actions, thoughts, feelings and motivations of others, but also it is unpredictable in my own actions, thoughts, feelings and motivations. That factor, the unpredictability, gives the knot a life of its own.

I realize that some people may think we all have unpredictable lives and to that, I agree. It is true, nothing is promised, we only have today, or right now – the present. But, I have no problem living in the present. In fact it’s one of the things I’m actually good at doing. The more I live in the moment, taking nothing for granted, the more I can ignore that damn knot.

But occasionally, I cannot ignore it. Unpredictability sets me right in the middle of the heavy ropes and dares me to try to untangle the knot.

And I try.

I work on the tangled mess and try to unravel it one thread at a time. Rarely do I know if I am making any progress or if I am simply creating a bigger mess in the end.

I fear the latter is what is happening."

-The Adoption Knot

Thoughts on the most wonderful time of the year.

The holiday season is in full swing.  Christmas trees and lights are going up, Christmas carols have been playing on the radio for weeks, and the overwhelming spirit of Christmas cheer is nearly palpable.  One thing I've noticed though, is as Christmas draws near, people seem to have less patience.  And with little patience, a short temper typically follows; particularly when it comes to interacting with cashiers and other retail workers.

I'd like to believe we live in a world where most people are reasonable, decent, and genuinely kind at their core.  But I've watched some of the nicest, most decent people I know verbally berate cashiers for computer glitches, and it sometimes makes me wonder.  I worked in retail for a few years, and in that time I encountered a lot of rude people.  Although I don't have any true horror stories of my own, I have been appalled on many occasions at the way I've seen other people treat retail workers.
When I have questioned these people about their behavior, the most popular response is, "This is what they're paid to do, and they need to do it correctly."

Stop.  Just stop.  Stop using the fact that your cashier gets paid as justification for acting like a jerk.  Their mistakes do not give you license to belittle or shame who they are as people.  I bet if you asked any retail employee what their favorite part of their job is, very few would say the customers.  But I bet if you asked them what their least favorite part was, the vast majority would say customers.  In an industry tailored around the consumer, isn't it just a little sad that very few of the workers actually like the people they're supposed to be working to please?

I can empathize with anyone who loses their temper occasionally.  I lose mine from time to time as well, and when that happens I often take it out on whoever is around me.  But that doesn't make lashing out okay or acceptable.  The lines are going to be long regardless of how you feel or act.  Computer glitches will continue to happen, causing quick purchases to drag on for nearly twenty minutes.  The holidays are stressful for both employees and customers, but just try to remember that everyone involved is a human with feelings of their own.  So the next time you feel like you're about to lose your cool in the checkout line, take a deep breath, count to ten, and then decide if this is really worth freaking out over.  Chances are, it's not.

Yes, Human Trafficking IS Still a Problem

Last night, my best friend and I got together to drink a little wine and watch Pretty Little Liars.  We were talking while the show downloaded, and she began telling me about one of her coworkers who had no idea that human trafficking is a problem in the world; let alone the United States.  For a minute I was taken aback.  I mean, sure, I realize that a lot of people are uneducated in regards to the full scope of sex and labor trafficking, but I had no idea that some people don't even know there's a problem.

So for anyone who may not know:  yes, human trafficking is a problem internationally.  Yes, human trafficking is a problem within the United States.  And yes, it is even a problem locally.  I work with a local non-profit organization called the Gray Haven Project and they serve survivors of human trafficking here in Virginia.  This summer, we were blessed to have a ton of fantastic and awesome interns who've helped in doing so much great work.  From revamping brochures to presenting a documentary to raise awareness with the public, the Gray Haven has really been about to touch the community.

So I want to share with you an infographic created by one of our interns which provides a brief, but comprehensive view of what trafficking in Virginia looks like.  Of all identified human trafficking victims in Virginia 87% were exploited for sex, 8% were forced into labor trafficking, and the last 5% experienced both forms of slavery.  While these statistics alone are frightening and heart breaking, these are just the reported cases.  Due to the lucrative underground business of buying and selling human beings, it's difficult to form an accurate gauge on exactly how bad it really is.

Image Source

While the media has largely sensationalized trafficking to be a crime only affecting girls in their early teens, the truth is that women, men, and children of all ages are vulnerable to these crimes.  Of victims served in central Virginia, their ages have ranged from 12 all the way to 62, and 62% of victims identified are actually adults.

I urge you to share this infographic with your friends, family, strangers, and anyone else who will listen.  This is a travesty which we need to combat tooth and nail.  This is an issue in which we should all support one another in.  Get educated, get involved, and make a difference in the life of someone who doesn't share the freedom we have.

We're Just Not Cutting It - An Honest Look at American Immigration

"Well, when I say uncivilized, what I mean is . . ."

"What you mean is not like you."

-Disney's Pocahontas

Immigration is a subject that has been passionately debated around the world for generations, and as the global economy continues to evolve, this debate will continue for years.  Among the debates and arguments, each side provides compelling evidence, and thus makes choosing between them exceedingly difficult.  For proponents of restricted immigration, they cite sources which prove that current immigrants are more likely to take advantage of public welfare services such as food stamps (SNAP benefits) or healthcare such as Medicaid.  In fact, in 2000, "8.0 percent of immigrant households received cash benefits, compared to fewer than 6 percent of native households" (Borjas, 90).  While these figures are difficult to refute, proponents for less restrictive immigration laws can point out that while the financial burden of social programs to native Americans is apparent, it is minimal.  It was estimated in 1995 by the National Academy that immigration "increased the tax bill of the typical native-born household . . .  by around $200 annually" which is around $18 billion per year (Borjas, 92).

Image Source

In May of 2013, the Immigration Policy Center by the American Immigration Council produced a report on the current condition of illegal and legal immigration in California.  While many critics may guffaw at the statistics presented, the substantial evidence in favor of immigration reform is significant.  In California alone, there were an estimated 10.2 million (documented and undocumented) immigrants in 2011 and of those, nearly 50% were naturalized citizens - meaning they have the right to vote.  I highly urge you to check out the statistics and facts for yourself, but the most clamorous evidence I found concerned what would happen should the US government suddenly deport all unauthorized immigrants in California.  If all those living in California were deported today, it would reduce economic activity in the state by a staggering $360.1 billion and 3.6 million jobs (for both native Americans and immigrants alike) would be lost.
Hollie McNish, a British woman who writes amazing poetry in the form of spoken word recently penned and recited a wonderful piece on the (often wrong) preconceived notions of immigrants.  I encourage you to watch the video below, but please be warned that there is quite a bit of foul language.

Hollie, who has studied economics, points out in her video that "it's nice to have someone to blame our lack of jobs upon, but immigration is not as plain," and how right she is.  Very few immigrants simply leech off of the government or look constantly for hand outs.  They spend money, buy houses, put their children through school, invest money in stock, etc.  In fact, the purchasing power of Latinos alone in California is $310.5 billion!  What our country needs is an open, honest, and transparent dialogue about how to approach immigration.  Beating our chests, demonizing human beings, and ripping families apart does nothing to solve the problem.
We need immigration reform which treats human beings with respect, and not isolationist propaganda intended to encourage American citizens to hate anything or anyone foreign born.  It has been proven time and again that both legal and illegal immigration can be beneficial to the country.  I don't have all the answers and I won't pretend to, but our current policies just aren't cutting it.

Power To the People: One woman's struggle for peace in Burma

There are few thinkers in the modern world who captivate millions with their kindness and love for people, and Aung San Suu Kyi ranks among them. Fully supported around the world by influential people such as Hillary Clinton, Daw Suu has enchanted her people for decades as she has strived to lead them from the bonds of unrelenting dictatorship in Burma. From 1988, when she was elected secretary of the National League for Democracy, to today, Daw Suu has battled tirelessly for her people. What sets her apart from all other world leaders, save for leaders like Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi, is that her platform lies in the basis of nonviolence.

She differs from other female leaders in Asia due to the fact that while her father was a prominent politician to the Burmese people, her decision to lead them in 1988 was hers and hers alone. Unlike Indira Gandhi in India, when Daw Suu promoted peace, peace is what she gave to her people. Her nonviolent strategies and unwillingness to bend to the rule of the autocratic government have also drastically set her apart from other Asian leaders, and has also led to extended time imprisoned and under house arrest. She is a woman who holds true to convictions, without fear or shame of the fact. Her gender doesn’t dictate who she is because she is simply a human being who wishes to see all of humanity have the choice to live freely without fear of their basic human rights being infringed upon. In the book of conversations between Daw Suu and Alan Clements she had this to say: “But we know that we are not alone. The cause of liberty and justice finds sympathetic responses responses around the world. Thinking and feeling people everywhere, regardless of color or creed, understand the deeply rooted human need for a meaningful existence that goes beyond the mere gratification of material desires. Those fortunate enough to live in societies where they are entitled to full political rights can reach out to help their less fortunate brethren in other areas of our troubled planet” (Clements).

As a person, Aung San Suu Kyi is one of the most gentle and genuine to ever walk the planet. She radiates empathy and kindness which permeate through her speech and demeanor. She is a slight and tiny woman many would perceive weak, but her eyes behold a burning passion for liberty that can not be squelched. As a devout Buddhist, Daw Suu has devoted her life to achieving a constant state of metta, or loving-kindness. Throughout both the book, lecture, and documentary on this brave and empowered woman, Daw Suu repeats the importance of forgiveness many times. To find the inner strength not only to forgive, but also to welcome reconciliation with those who have held her prisoner for nearly two decades shows a deep understanding and comprehension of freedom. To quote Mahatma Gandhi, “The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.”

Of all the Asian women leaders discussed throughout this course, the most similar to Daw Suu would have been Corazon Aquino. They both possessed quiet, but commanding demeanors which enabled them to motivate, inspire, and captivate the people of their nations toward action. Unlike Corazon, however, Daw Suu made the decision to lead her people of her own volition. That isn’t to say her father’s political career and death didn’t motivate her, but it wasn’t the deciding factor in her decision. She followed in her father’s footsteps because they stood for the same cause; to better humanity in Burma. Where Corazon was thrust into politics mostly because of her political ties, Daw Suu willingly walked into the life of politician because she felt it was the right and just thing to do.

Although one could fill an entire thesaurus with words used to describe Aung San Suu Kyi, among the first would be heroine. She has devoted her life to seeing the freedom and liberation of her people and at a Wallenberg Lecture she said that “a dedication to the cause of freedom binds us close together,” (14:10-14:15). How true these words are. In fact, not only does she have the support of Hillary Clinton, but also George Bush. In 2008, he awarded her with the Congressional Gold Medal and went as far as to pass a law allowing her to receive the medal will imprisoned. Her unyielding stake in the freedom of her brothers and sisters in bondage make Daw Suu an exemplary person.

In Chapter 13 of Aung San Suu Kyi: the Voice of Hope, Alan Clements describes Aung San Suu Kyi as a “voice that speaks for the voiceless, a power that stands up for the powerless - the simple people, the ordinary folks, and the disenfranchised” (Clements). Daw Suu, an extremely gracious woman, answers by explaining how there are many people who attain greatness and have it hidden within them. She goes on to say being aware of the world around us will aid tremendously in helping the cause of people everywhere. By allowing the people knowledge, Daw Suu implies, it will give them better understanding about choosing between right and wrong.

Truth, according to Aung San Suu Kyi, is closely and deeply related to the act of forgiveness. In Chapter 1 of Aung San Suu Kyi, she says that she “believe[s] truth and reconciliation go together” (Clements). She also says, “I don’t think that people will really thirst for vengeance once they have been given access to the truth. But the fact that they are denied access to the truth simple strokes the anger and hatred in them. That their sufferings have not been acknowledge makes people angry. That is one of the great differences between SLORC [State Law & Order Restoration Council] and ourselves. We do not think that there is anything wrong with saying we made a mistake and that we are sorry” (Clements). This compelling passage sheds a new light on those who have been oppressed by unfair and unjust laws. She says here that all the people want is to be set free and apologized to.

Many may ask why those living in Burma don’t simply rise up against their oppressive and controlling regime, and oust the leader. While this sounds impressive on paper, it simply isn’t practical for a population of impoverished people to take on their heavily armed military which have frightened and terrorized them for generations. Indeed, fear is a factor which keeps many people in Burma continuously oppressed. “Almost everyone says that they are afraid of SLORC’s wrath: afraid of retribution; afraid that if they speak out they’ll pay for it with imprisonment,” says Alan Clements in Chapter 1 (Clements). Daw Suu doesn’t say that she isn’t fearful of what the government in Burma may do to her, but the emancipation of her people is greater than any amount of fear that could ever possess her.

In line with her Buddhist ideals, Aung San Suu Kyi ardently advocates for the exercise of compassion amongst her peoples. In Chapter 2 of the Alan Clements book, Daw Suu tells the tale of two quarreling sides and how Buddha intervened. Rather than telling them to stop from afar, Buddha stepped in between the two sides so that they would be forced to hurt him if they continued to fight. This, Daw Suu, implies, is what true compassion is all about. By pouring out love to one another through acts in the community, this furthers the agenda of compassion. There is a scripture in the Christian Bible taken from Galatians 2:6 that instructs followers to “carry each other’s burdens and in this way fulfill the law of Christ.” Daw Suu is instructing people around the world to do just that, “by coming to the families of political prisoners and offering them practical help and by surrounding them with love, compassion and moral support” (Clements, Chapter 2). She then goes on to liken compassion to “a mother’s courage to sacrifice herself comes out of her love for her child” (Clements, Chapter 2). If more people would live their lives being more compassionate and caring toward one another, perhaps such gross injustice and denial of human rights wouldn’t reign supreme.

Aung San Suu Kyi, who has led her people for more than twenty years, is the integral part of the push for democracy in Burma. She essentially has become the face of all the above listed attributes not only to her countrymen, but also to people around the world. Her steadfast desire to serve her country, at the expense of her familial and social ties, must prove exceedingly tiring, but she prevails. She missed a huge chunk of her two boys’ lives as well as the final breaths of her beloved husband in 1999. These burdens must weigh heavily upon her heart and soul, but still she fights for her people. Her unwavering devotion to the people she leads is truly an act that can barely be expressed. She has laid down her life so that others may have a chance to prosper, and that is truly amazing.

If the liberation of Burma occurs during the lifetime of Aung San Suu Kyi, as I sincerely hope, it would only be fitting for her to remain the head of the revolution. Her struggle for democracy within her country, in my opinion, sets her on equal footing with other great minds in history such as William Wilberforce, Abraham Lincoln, and Martin Luther King, Jr. It would have been so simple to retreat after visiting Burma in 1988 and return to the privileged life she’d led, but Daw Suu realized that she was needed. In the future, I believe that Daw Suu’s passionate light will ignite a burning fire of peaceful revolution that will spread not only through Burma, but the whole world as well. Injustice may never be completely eradicated from our planet, but to people like Aung San Suu Kyi, that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t try.

There are few thinkers in the modern world who captivate millions with their kindness and love for people, and Aung San Suu Kyi ranks among them. Fully supported around the world by influential people such as Hillary Clinton, Daw Suu has enchanted her people for decades as she has strived to lead them from the bonds of unrelenting dictatorship in Burma. From 1988, when she was elected secretary of the National League for Democracy, to today, Daw Suu has battled tirelessly for her people. What sets her apart from all other world leaders, save for leaders like Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi, is that her platform lies in the basis of nonviolence.

She differs from other female leaders in Asia due to the fact that while her father was a prominent politician to the Burmese people, her decision to lead them in 1988 was hers and hers alone. Unlike Indira Gandhi in India, when Daw Suu promoted peace, peace is what she gave to her people. Her nonviolent strategies and unwillingness to bend to the rule of the autocratic government have also drastically set her apart from other Asian leaders, and has also led to extended time imprisoned and under house arrest. She is a woman who holds true to convictions, without fear or shame of the fact. Her gender doesn’t dictate who she is because she is simply a human being who wishes to see all of humanity have the choice to live freely without fear of their basic human rights being infringed upon. In the book of conversations between Daw Suu and Alan Clements she had this to say: “But we know that we are not alone. The cause of liberty and justice finds sympathetic responses responses around the world. Thinking and feeling people everywhere, regardless of color or creed, understand the deeply rooted human need for a meaningful existence that goes beyond the mere gratification of material desires. Those fortunate enough to live in societies where they are entitled to full political rights can reach out to help their less fortunate brethren in other areas of our troubled planet” (Clements).

As a person, Aung San Suu Kyi is one of the most gentle and genuine to ever walk the planet. She radiates empathy and kindness which permeate through her speech and demeanor. She is a slight and tiny woman many would perceive weak, but her eyes behold a burning passion for liberty that can not be squelched. As a devout Buddhist, Daw Suu has devoted her life to achieving a constant state of metta, or loving-kindness. Throughout both the book, lecture, and documentary on this brave and empowered woman, Daw Suu repeats the importance of forgiveness many times. To find the inner strength not only to forgive, but also to welcome reconciliation with those who have held her prisoner for nearly two decades shows a deep understanding and comprehension of freedom. To quote Mahatma Gandhi, “The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.”

Of all the Asian women leaders discussed throughout this course, the most similar to Daw Suu would have been Corazon Aquino. They both possessed quiet, but commanding demeanors which enabled them to motivate, inspire, and captivate the people of their nations toward action. Unlike Corazon, however, Daw Suu made the decision to lead her people of her own volition. That isn’t to say her father’s political career and death didn’t motivate her, but it wasn’t the deciding factor in her decision. She followed in her father’s footsteps because they stood for the same cause; to better humanity in Burma. Where Corazon was thrust into politics mostly because of her political ties, Daw Suu willingly walked into the life of politician because she felt it was the right and just thing to do.

Although one could fill an entire thesaurus with words used to describe Aung San Suu Kyi, among the first would be heroine. She has devoted her life to seeing the freedom and liberation of her people and at a Wallenberg Lecture she said that “a dedication to the cause of freedom binds us close together,” (14:10-14:15). How true these words are. In fact, not only does she have the support of Hillary Clinton, but also George Bush. In 2008, he awarded her with the Congressional Gold Medal and went as far as to pass a law allowing her to receive the medal will imprisoned. Her unyielding stake in the freedom of her brothers and sisters in bondage make Daw Suu an exemplary person.

In Chapter 13 of Aung San Suu Kyi: the Voice of Hope, Alan Clements describes Aung San Suu Kyi as a “voice that speaks for the voiceless, a power that stands up for the powerless - the simple people, the ordinary folks, and the disenfranchised” (Clements). Daw Suu, an extremely gracious woman, answers by explaining how there are many people who attain greatness and have it hidden within them. She goes on to say being aware of the world around us will aid tremendously in helping the cause of people everywhere. By allowing the people knowledge, Daw Suu implies, it will give them better understanding about choosing between right and wrong.

Truth, according to Aung San Suu Kyi, is closely and deeply related to the act of forgiveness. In Chapter 1 of Aung San Suu Kyi, she says that she “believe[s] truth and reconciliation go together” (Clements). She also says, “I don’t think that people will really thirst for vengeance once they have been given access to the truth. But the fact that they are denied access to the truth simple strokes the anger and hatred in them. That their sufferings have not been acknowledge makes people angry. That is one of the great differences between SLORC [State Law & Order Restoration Council] and ourselves. We do not think that there is anything wrong with saying we made a mistake and that we are sorry” (Clements). This compelling passage sheds a new light on those who have been oppressed by unfair and unjust laws. She says here that all the people want is to be set free and apologized to.

Many may ask why those living in Burma don’t simply rise up against their oppressive and controlling regime, and oust the leader. While this sounds impressive on paper, it simply isn’t practical for a population of impoverished people to take on their heavily armed military which have frightened and terrorized them for generations. Indeed, fear is a factor which keeps many people in Burma continuously oppressed. “Almost everyone says that they are afraid of SLORC’s wrath: afraid of retribution; afraid that if they speak out they’ll pay for it with imprisonment,” says Alan Clements in Chapter 1 (Clements). Daw Suu doesn’t say that she isn’t fearful of what the government in Burma may do to her, but the emancipation of her people is greater than any amount of fear that could ever possess her.

In line with her Buddhist ideals, Aung San Suu Kyi ardently advocates for the exercise of compassion amongst her peoples. In Chapter 2 of the Alan Clements book, Daw Suu tells the tale of two quarreling sides and how Buddha intervened. Rather than telling them to stop from afar, Buddha stepped in between the two sides so that they would be forced to hurt him if they continued to fight. This, Daw Suu, implies, is what true compassion is all about. By pouring out love to one another through acts in the community, this furthers the agenda of compassion. There is a scripture in the Christian Bible taken from Galatians 2:6 that instructs followers to “carry each other’s burdens and in this way fulfill the law of Christ.” Daw Suu is instructing people around the world to do just that, “by coming to the families of political prisoners and offering them practical help and by surrounding them with love, compassion and moral support” (Clements, Chapter 2). She then goes on to liken compassion to “a mother’s courage to sacrifice herself comes out of her love for her child” (Clements, Chapter 2). If more people would live their lives being more compassionate and caring toward one another, perhaps such gross injustice and denial of human rights wouldn’t reign supreme.

Aung San Suu Kyi, who has led her people for more than twenty years, is the integral part of the push for democracy in Burma. She essentially has become the face of all the above listed attributes not only to her countrymen, but also to people around the world. Her steadfast desire to serve her country, at the expense of her familial and social ties, must prove exceedingly tiring, but she prevails. She missed a huge chunk of her two boys’ lives as well as the final breaths of her beloved husband in 1999. These burdens must weigh heavily upon her heart and soul, but still she fights for her people. Her unwavering devotion to the people she leads is truly an act that can barely be expressed. She has laid down her life so that others may have a chance to prosper, and that is truly amazing.

If the liberation of Burma occurs during the lifetime of Aung San Suu Kyi, as I sincerely hope, it would only be fitting for her to remain the head of the revolution. Her struggle for democracy within her country, in my opinion, sets her on equal footing with other great minds in history such as William Wilberforce, Abraham Lincoln, and Martin Luther King, Jr. It would have been so simple to retreat after visiting Burma in 1988 and return to the privileged life she’d led, but Daw Suu realized that she was needed. In the future, I believe that Daw Suu’s passionate light will ignite a burning fire of peaceful revolution that will spread not only through Burma, but the whole world as well. Injustice may never be completely eradicated from our planet, but to people like Aung San Suu Kyi, that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t try.

Works Cited

Voice of Hope:  Conversations with Alan Clements

Democracies, Soft Power, and a Close Look at the Future of an Emerging Multipolar World

During his Farewell Address in 1796, the first President of the United States of America, George Washington said that, "history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government" (Washington).  These words were offered as advice from Washington, who realized that democracy isn't an article of "one size fits all" clothing and can not be applied globally without serious repercussions.  Other countries, like China, realize that achieving a place of global power doesn't imply enforcing their brand of government onto the rest of the world, and as a result, this has enhanced the country's global approval.
The major players composing the multipolar world today are America, China, Russia, the European Union, and India.  China and India, in particular, have challenged the global dominance of the United States through what is known as soft power - which is "the ability to influence and shape the preferences of others" in a myriad of ways - and this definition was expanded by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) in 2006 (Hiro, 237).  In addition to soft power challenges to the United States, there are four main flash points (volatile circumstances) that the country could face in the future.  These points all concern fundamental differences in the governance of the United States, China, and Russia.  The "take it or leave it" attitude of America toward nearly all foreign cultures has greatly led to the decline of the global opinion of America.
Washington would be wise to realize that democracy as a political model, while largely successful in the States, may not be the most effective style of government for all countries in the world.  With the rise of outwardly peaceful countries like China - who would rather not resort to military power in order to achieve results - soft power influence is a major player.  America will face future flash points with both China and Russia as ideologies continue to clash in the coming years.  The decline that America has experienced the past few decades could be alleviated if Washington would take a step back and examine the way foreign policy is conducted.  In learning from past mistakes, the country will fare better in succeeding in the adversities of tomorrow.

American Foreign Policy - Why Doesn't it Work Everywhere?
Over 200 years after George Washington delivered his Farewell Address, American foreign policy is far removed from what our founding father would have preferred.  In fact, during the presidency of Vladimir Putin in 2006, the prestigious Yuri-Levada Institute set out to gauge the attitudes of Russian citizens concerning their highest priorities.  Much to the chagrin of the West, this "wide-scale survey showed that 35 percent [of Russian citizens] wanted to return to the Soviet system, 26 percent" favored the control of Putin, and a mere 16 percent fancied Western style democracy (Hiro, 220).  Russians, in stark contrast to Americans, were more concerned with secure housing and safety from harm than they were with freedom of expression or association.  This idea of collective success over individualistic success is also found largely in the Chinese culture and society.  China, however, also realized that there are attractive traits of democracy and so set out to create a "democracy with Chinese characteristics" (Hiro, 228).  Between 1990 and 1999, China made leaps and strides toward fighting human rights violations within their borders by granting three vital laws to citizens.
One year after the Tiananmen Square protest, China enacted the Administrative Litigation Act.  This gave citizens the right to legal retaliation in the event that the government abused their power.  Four years later, in 1994, China passed the State Indemnity Law which also gave citizens the extended power to sue for compensation against the government when their rights or property were infringed upon.  The third law was passed in 1999 and allowed for the prosecution of prominent people such as the "state's administration, economic, and judicial agencies" as well as "the CPC's [Communist Party of China's] leadership organs" (Hiro, 231).  The passing of these laws were monumental because they were China's first attempts at increasing the well being of their citizens as a whole.  For many countries in the East and Asia, finding the middle ground between a free democracy and authoritarian rule is a top political priority, as most countries wish to exercise limited freedom while retaining a strict rule.

Soft Power Influence and Implications for the Future
When it comes to the most influential country in the world, the United States still ranks number 1, but that doesn't mean other countries aren't catching up.  In the early 1990s, Joseph Nye penned the term "soft power" and described it as "the ability to influence and shape the preferences of others" through "a nation's culture, values, and achievements" (Hiro, 237).  In 2006, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) extended this soft power definition to include 64 criteria including "defense capability, economic strength, scientific and technological capabilities, human development, the media, and arts and culture" (Hiro, 238).  The hosting of the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing gave the People's Republic of China (PRC) their first prime opportunity to flex their soft power muscle - and that they certainly did.  The opening ceremony lasted for four hours and was televised to an "estimated 4 billion [people], nearly two-thirds of the human race" and cost $100 million (Hiro, 239).  This utilization of the media effectively portrayed China in a positive light and increased their level of global acceptance.  China hasn't been the only country to promote soft power through the media, however, countries like Qatar and India have joined in as well.
Prior to 1996, the only international news sources available to the public were the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and Cable News Network (CNN).  This changed completely when the broadcasting company Al Jazeera was founded in Qatar in an effort to "offer a global perspective from an Arab and Muslim angle" and remains so today (Hiro, 244).  In addition to Al Jazeera in Qatar, India has taken the limelight in popular feature films.  Although Bollywood certainly isn't Hollywood, these films continue to gain international popularity largely due to the fact that Eastern countries relate more easily to these than Westernized films.  Although soft power may not carry as much force and domination as hard power, the seeds of soft power are sewn over time.  These are norms, customs, and notions that build gradually - such as the increased popular opinion of China over the declining opinion of the United States.

Flash Points - Is There a Troubling Future Ahead?
As America continues to conduct foreign policy, there will be four main points which may be the source of fighting or strife with other countries (particularly China and Russia).  These four categories are "perceived threats to national security, gaining control of disputed territories, competition for vital resources such as oil and natural gas, and currency and trade" (Hiro, 251).  Throughout the past decade, Washington has often cited threats to national security as a main reason for military involvement in matters.  Possibly the best example of this threat rests in the relations between the Kremlin and the Pentagon.  Vladimir Putin, understandably worried about America's possession of nuclear war heads and the strained Russia-America history, proposed the set up of an anti-missile defense system in Turkey or Azerbaijan, but George W. Bush declined the offer.  Although Putin attempted once again to negotiate in 2008, Bush refused to compromise and when the next Russian president was elected in November he wasn't shy to say that if America attacked, Russia would point all their weapons at Poland.  In addition to the matters with Russia which are likely to escalate in the future, relations with China are also expected to heat up over disputes regarding the country Taiwan.
Taiwan, a country which the PRC claim as their own, has become a hot spot of controversy in both the United States and China.  The United States want to prevent China from extending into other countries and as a result supply Taiwan with ample resources to use against China should they be needed.  Should the PRC enact an air force raid against Taiwan, the country is expected to perform relatively well until United States reinforcements can be dispatched to aid them.  In addition to these disputes over territories, America's relations with the international community will drastically be strained under competition for the world's dwindling natural resources.
The fight to find the most oil and other natural resources will only escalate in the coming years as the world's populations strain reserves.  What this means for America is that there will be a growing need to import land-intensive oil and natural resources from countries which it hasn't always been very cordial to.  This may prove a difficult and daunting task for the White House if they are unable to find a way to compromise with those they ardently disagree with.

Conclusion
Former American Congressman Ron Paul once said that, "setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms," and his words are undeniably true in the case of America.  Should the United States wish to conduct peaceful and mutually beneficial relations with the global community, the government must learn to compromise and make adjustments as all other countries have been forced to do since World War II for Washington.  With the likelihood of soft power challenges from other major powers in the world, and future flash points, it is imperative for the country to rethink the conduction of foreign policy in the near future.

Sources
Hiro, Dilip.  After Empire the Birth of a Multipolar World. New York: Nation Books, 2010.

Washington, George.  United States. Yale Law School. "Washington's Farewell Address 1796". New Haven: Lilian Goldman Law Library.

Setbacks and Success

The past few weeks of my life have been awesome, overall.  I've experienced unprecedented amounts of both defeat and triumph, all the while trying hard to remember that God has control.  The semester is nearing an end, and while I did really well in the majority of my classes, I skirted around too many deadlines in one and as a result will receive a failing grade.  It's been a while since I let myself down this much, so my self pity meter was well maxed out for a few days.  And although I'm still disappointed in myself for not trying harder--because at 23 I really shouldn't be making such careless and reckless choices concerning my education--I also know that this one failure does not define who I am.  I made a big mistake, and my GPA will suffer as a result, but I'll be alright.
But enough with the tragic, on to great news.  I'm heavily involved in fighting human trafficking and modern day slavery, and about a month ago, I noticed an ad for a volunteer position with a non-profit anti-trafficking agency.  Being the social media butterfly I am, I quickly responded and within a few days got a call back!  After a few more interviews and days of training, I am pleased to say that I'm the social media manager for them!  I am elated at this opportunity to work directly with survivors of human trafficking and aid in their recovery, all the while showing the world all the amazing work these people do.
One of our survivors had a great day in court yesterday.  Another is preparing for birth any day now, and I can't wait to welcome the newest member of our community.  The last few weeks have taught me that God isn't just with us during the big stuff, he's with us in the details, too.  From the terrifying moments when we fear we've been conquered, to the blissful ones when we feel accomplished, and even in the quiet moments when we are simply content-God is with is.  I'm proud to say that while I have nothing figured out, I know that God has a magnificent plan for my life, and I'm loving watching it unfold around me.

An open letter to Democrats and Republicans

Dear Democrats and Republicans,

We need to have a serious heart-to-heart.  I've got to be honest, I am ashamed of you both.  You've allowed two trivial symbols to become a dictation for who you are as an individual, and as a result they have replaced the American flag in your hearts.
You care more about making your opponent sound like an imbecile than you do about solving the issues at hand.  You've fabricated lies against one another, simply for the sake of furthering your own agendas, and I'm nauseated just thinking about it.  What gets me the most is that you both stand on your soap boxes, broadcasting to the world that your opponent has in some way harmed your name or character, all the while committing the same acts.
I have seen conservatives so far gone they actually wish death on our president simply because he belongs to the Democratic party.

I just can't understand how someone could hold that much hate for someone they've never met.

I've also seen Democrats blame Republicans for any future school shootings that may occur in the United States.

Both of these sentiments, and any others like them, are hypocritical and detrimental to any progress in America.  I am so angry that my country has become this; a place where emotional inclinations take precedence over finding a solution for the betterment of all citizens.  This country was once magnificent; a haven for all those fleeing from persecution, and that's the America I wish to live in.
You have built this inescapable two-party duality in hopes of continuing this heinous system, but I refuse to accept.  Belittling my opponent simply because he disagrees will never be a value I consider American.  In order to make any sort of change for the better we must recognize that the institution of political parties has driven a knife through the backbone of our country.  And this knife will sever all that our founding fathers battled so tirelessly to protect if we aren't diligent.
I implore you to take a minute to forget the elephant and the donkey and remember who you are.  You aren't a Democrat.  You aren't a Republican.  You're an American, and no political party should ever drive a wedge this large between you and your fellow citizens.

Sincerely,

KP

Fair Trade, Free Trade, and Caring a Little More for the World

I am adamant in my belief that any country, no matter how large or small, will always benefit more from trade than without.  For the past three months I have been conducting research on the global banana trade for an international trade class, and the information found has floored me.  While I could bore you for days with facts that only my Econ professor will find interesting, I'll condense it to a few aspects that warrant sharing.

Image Source

Free Trade vs. Fair Trade - What are the differences?

First things first, free trade describes an economic policy in which countries adopt a hands off approach to international trade.  Rather than impose tariffs (taxes on imports or exports) or quotas (limits on import or export quantities), this style of economic theory hinges on the idea that any barriers to trade create more problems than solutions.  Fair trade, on the other hand, operates around the central idea that some countries need a little push in the right direction.  They institute strict regulations and guidelines for groups of farmers to meet and in return offer premiums for the products they export.  The best quality of Fairtrade is possibly it's guarantee to pay a minimum price for products that will never fall below market value.

In a perfect world, free trade would flourish without obstruction.  But the rise of corporations like Walmart, who perpetuate price wars, prevent agricultural workers from receiving adequate pay for their services.  Not to mention American companies like Dole, Del Monte, and Chiquita, who own shares in banana plantations worldwide.  When the money intended to pay the workers who've labored tirelessly only ends up in the hands of a rich CEO of a corporation, it could be cause for new economic policy.

Free, Fair, or Both - Which policy works best?
Proponents on each side of the free and fair trade debate are able to produce compelling evidence supporting both claims, but the question isn't whether fair trade and free trade should be opposing policies.  Take the popular North American Free Trade Agreement between the United States, Canada, and Mexico for example.  "Those who declare NAFTA a success cite statistics showing a surge in trade, jobs, and productivity throughout the free-trade zone.  People who deride NAFTA as a disaster have data that show real job losses, downward pressure on wages, and widening gaps between the rich and poor in participating countries," says Patricia Panchak of Industry Week.
The point is, no matter the economic policy imposed, there will always be both winners and losers.  The trick is finding a balance which creates fewest losers and most winners for all countries involved.  This is why I believe it is necessary to combine both free and fair trade policies in a country by country basis.
When considering countries involved in trade, it is not only necessary but also imperative to factor well being of citizens affected in the gains and losses.  Regardless of whether it is through fair trade or free trade I think we can all agree that all people who work to bring us products should be adequately compensated.

Trade Theories - Further Reading
To find out more about free trade, fair trade, and their respective practices, check out the following links.
Free Trade vs. Fair Trade
Free Trade (Wikipedia)
Fair Trade (Wikipedia)

Why I Believe in Equal Marriage Rights for All

As a believer in Christ, it is sometimes difficult to voice my opinion on a touchy subject without sounding hypocritical.  So please bear with me while reading this post.  I want to start out by saying that belief-my interpretation, anyway-isn't based in reason or logic.  By biblical standards, yes, I believe that homosexuality is a sin.  That being said, getting drunk is also a sin.  So is cheating on a test.  My point is, yes, homosexuality is a sin.  But it is their sin, not mine.
Unless you've been living under a rock (or haven't recently logged into Facebook), you've probably heard or read that the Supreme Court is hearing cases concerning the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8 this Tuesday and Wednesday.  It has sparked quite a controversy throughout the country, and many have taken to changing their profile pictures in a sign of solidarity for the overturn of both of these acts.
In a country founded in the ideal of freedom for all, I don't find it unfair to liken the Gay Rights Movement to the Civil Rights Movement.  Once upon a time, white folks grabbed their cardboard signs with out of context Bible verses and proudly picketed the streets, perverting the Bible to fit their own agendas.  Today, the LGBT is having a similar experience. In a perfect world, all people would believe in the same god, but we were given free will for a purpose.  So we could choose.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

These words, written over two hundred years ago and crafted by genius men, will forever ring true.  We are all created equally.  So according to the Declaration, we were given three main rights:  life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  America was founded in the principle of freedom, that all are given equal opportunity to excel.  And it is that same freedom that caused our founding fathers to push for the separation of church and state.  Because in a country founded on freedom, it is not only unfair but also unjust for a few individuals to play 'Mother May I' with the rights of all.
To quote a friend of mine, "God doesn't make the laws in America.  We the people, who believe many different things, have to come together to make a common set of laws we can all agree on.  These laws hurt some people who have just as much of a right to be here and have their voice heard as you do."
As we discussed the topic further, she pointed out that somewhere along the way the country has condensed two discussions into one issue.  The first is whether gay couples should have the same rights and privileges under the law as straight couples.  The second of these discussions is whether or not homosexuality is inherently sinful and wrong.  They are both valid questions, but questions that should be debated in different arenas.  Under the law, any couple that is eligible for marriage should be granted the same rights and advantages.  Cases that the Supreme Court hears falls under jurisdiction of the law, and should not be based in moral conviction.  Two committed adults, who want to make the decision to marry, should be recognized under the law:  regardless of their gender, race, color, or sexual orientation.

I'm sorry to anyone I know who reads this and thinks less of me, but I am very unapologetic when I say, "I proudly support equal rights for all."  This is a democracy and as long as it remains so, all people and their rights should be recognized.

Image Source

The Bechdel Test and Women in the Media

I was perusing Facebook the other night, and I followed this link one of my friends had shared asking if the movie I was about to watch passed the Bechdel Test.
Intrigued, I read through the short comic which detailed the rules of this test.  Essentially, in order for a movie to pass the Bechdel Test it must meet the following criteria:

1. There must be at least two female characters
2. They must talk to one another
3. And the subject of their discussion can not be a man

At first I thought the Bechdel Test would be similar to those pictures you see on Facebook asking you to "Name a state without the letter 'S' in it" that normally follow with a caption along the lines of, "It's harder than you think" when it's actually incredibly simple.  This test, however, was not quite as easy to pass.

The Bechdel Test - Films and TV Shows that Pass

Rather than turn this post into a listing of art that passes the Bechdel Test, I want to highlight a couple that pass with flying colors.  The film Matilda was released in 1996 and is based from the Roald Dahl book of the same name.  If follows a young girl who, unlike the rest of her family, has a passion for books and knowledge.  She battles her overbearing and chauvinistic father and despicable principal--all with the power of her mind.  Okay, so she has magical powers, but those powers originate in her mind, right?  Hocus pocus aside, this film teaches young children that their dreams, aspirations, and intelligence matter much more than a pretty face ever will.

Image Source

Law and Order: Special Victims Unit is a television show which goes above and beyond to satisfy the Bechdel Test.  SVU follows five New York City detectives who work to solve cases which are sexually explicit.  It is important to not that not every single episode of this show pass the Bechdel Test.  Given that the show predominantly centers around rape, men tend to be involved in 90 percent + of conversations.  However, the lady detectives on SVU are the farthest from weak women that I can think of.  There was a recent episode in which Detective Amanda Rollins' sister betrayed her in the worst ways imaginable, and Detective Rollins broke down.  Yes, she had an emotional breakdown, but she also gathered enough strength to hold her sister accountable.  The women on this show are not perfect, nor are they portrayed as superheroes compared to their male counterparts, but they are genuine.  They are real.  They aren't simply women who fight crime, rather they are people who fight crime, and just happen to have a vagina.

Image Source

The Bechdel Test - A Good Starting Point

The Bechdel Test is generally a fantastic tool to determine if a film or television show are worth watching, but it isn't a comprehensive dictator of the feminism present (or absent).  The point of the Bechdel Test shouldn't center around passing, but rather about demanding dimensional characters.  The old adage is that art imitates life, and if this is the case, media has a lot of catching up.  Men and women alike are not measured by the words they mutter about the other, but by the people they are.  I'm not looking to watch stereotypes about my gender or about my boyfriend's gender.  I am looking for writers, producers, directors, etc. to create multi-faceted people who just happen to be either male or female.  A strong character isn't created by gender.  A strong character is created by flaws and strengths.  If we are the inspiration, then I think we deserve to be portrayed accurately.

The Bechdel Test - Further Reading

If you want to learn more about the Bechdel Test and its implications in modern media, I encourage you to check out the following links.

Bechdel Movie Test
Bechdel and Me
Bechdel Test (Wikipedia)