Stop freaking out, Facebook is not dangerous!

It’s been about 10 years since Facebook has made its arrival in the Internet world, and dare I say, in our personal lives. Despite its success, pretty much everyone on this planet has at some point massively criticized this medium. I have heard people say: “it has ruined my social life”, “I have 500 friends but none of them are real”, “Thanks to Facebook, I don’t read books anymore”, “I have no more personal life”, and so forth. Even Facebook avid users like myself sometimes condemn what Facebook has done to our lives. In reality, Facebook has never done anything to anyone; it is the users’ responsibility to control Facebook, and not the other way round.

Contrary to popular belief, Facebook is not dangerous to our society, far from it. I am here to illustrate that Facebook is a remarkable tool that can allow you to succeed in numerous ways. Yes, I said it. If used appropriately, Facebook will allow you to be on top of the social, political, and/or intellectual ladder. You can build strong friendship, enlarge your general knowledge, make money, and/or freely discuss your principles (although this last one depends on where you live). For those of you who are not on Facebook, you are missing out a great deal, and you don’t even know it. For those of you who are and are not satisfied, then perhaps you are misusing it. And for those of you, who love Facebook like myself, bravo, you got it!

Right now, some of you might be thinking that Facebook is paying me to write this, or that I’m dating Mark Zuckerberg. I wish! If Facebook was paying me, I doubt that I would be posting this on my personal blog; a blog that has on average 5 visitors per day. And, if I was dating Mark, well… Let’s not go there; I don't want to get sued for saying something inappropriate. Truthfully speaking dear reader, I am writing this solely on my own initiative.

Yes, it is true, that Facebook has changed the way we communicate, socialize, build friendship, and share news. But I argue that those changes are positive changes. In fact, the day Facebook will kick the bucket—because let’s face it, everything has an end—I am certain that many of us will lose a piece of our lives with it. I have the utmost respect for the creators and the people that maintain this social media. And I am about to tell you why.

I have about 800 friends on Facebook. Most people would think that I probably don’t know those 800 people. “That’s too much”; “how can you really connect with those 800 people, it’s absurd!” But, if you think about how many people you know in your life (depending of course of how old you are), you will soon realize that 800 is not that much. And if you have lived in varied different cities, have attended many different schools, have had several jobs, and are involved in numerous associations, 800 people is a ridiculously tiny part of your friend circle. So first things first, don’t judge people by how many friends they have on Facebook’ that might mean that they have quadruple the number in real life.

Now, to answer the question: Do I know all the 800 people that are on my Facebook friends list. Well, of course I do, otherwise they wouldn’t be there. Why would anybody share information about themselves to someone they don't know? (Unless of course it's for advertising purposes, in which case, it is warranted). Each and every of the 800 friends I have on Facebook are or have been important in my life at some point. They bring me joy, useful information (and of course sometimes not so useful ones), and a sense of belonging. Some are family members, some are my very close friends, some are my colleagues, my students, childhood friends with whom I share incredible memories, some are people that I know from varied organizations I am part of, and some are classmates or professors. And yes, I know every single one of them, and can even tell you the first time I met them and the last time I saw them. So this is not just a simple “let me add all the people I saw one day” kinda thing; this is more like a “let me add this amazing person that I am growing to know and would love to connect more with”, or “let me add that person I spent 5 years in high school with eating together”.

Yes, of course I would love to spend actual time with them and meet them in person, but I simply cannot because they live miles away or my work/school schedule does not allow me to. But guess what? Thanks to Facebook I connect with them anytime I/they want. How is this a bad thing? I am able to see my godson grow on the other side of the planet thanks to photos his mom posts on Facebook; I am able to easily plan events with my friends so that we can go grab some delicious meals by the river; I am able to open a discussion group about a certain topic that is dear to me; I am able to chat with my mentor who allows me to grow wiser every single day. So I ask you again: How is all this a detriment to society? In fact, more than ever we are connecting with our peers, building strong friendships, creating new friendships, talking, and sharing. Isn’t that the definition of society? Just because it is being done over a computer doesn’t mean we are not together, of course we are. We are more than together; we are present in each other lives despite the distance that might separate us. This is magical people! Not dangerous. And by the way, nobody will ever tell you that the day they joined Facebook they stopped meeting their friends in person. Facebook is complimentary to your actual life, not a replacement.

Believe it or not, one of my major sources of international news is Facebook. Yep! With 800 friends that live all over the world, I get hands-on experience of what they are going through. From the Egypt revolution in 2011, to the Norway attack on the island of Utøya. From the earthquake in Japan, to soccer championships, etc. Plus, I’m lucky to have 800 intellectual or highly knowledgeable friends, hence, they post news links that are trustworthy and that I can follow right away without sitting in front of my TV and waiting for the journalist to talk about the information I want to hear. I said that Facebook increases general knowledge, and I say it again. Without it, most people wouldn’t be able to know half of what is going on in the world. And the same goes for me; the amount of useful information I gather from Facebook on a daily basis is double the amount I gathered when I was not.

Now, don’t get me wrong, all information on Facebook is not useful. Of course not; just like not all information on television or radio is. But like I said in the beginning of this post, when used appropriately Facebook teaches you a lot more than you think.

Now let’s talk about how Facebook can help your political agenda… Actually, I don’t even think I have to go over this, do I? Everyone who has followed Obama’s campaign knows first-hand that Facebook was a HUGE reason for his victory in the election. If you were not aware of this, simply google “Obama and Facebook”, or better yet, like Obama’s page on Facebook and see for yourself. Again, please know that I am not advertising for the Democratic Party in the US, and I am not being paid by anyone there. If I had connections with Obama, I would probably be writing about something of higher importance like Obama Care or something.

Financially, if you have a product to sell, an event to announce, a restaurant that you are opening… And you want your 800 friends to know about, Facebook allows you to do that in one simple click, and your 800 friends can even share it to their 800 friends. If this is not the best advertising tool there is, I don't know what it. It’s cheap, quick, and easily accessible. Needless to say, if you have a business and you are not using Facebook you are not reaching your highest potential as a business owner. You are forbidding all those Facebook users from being your potential costumers. Why?

To all the people that say that they have stopped reading since Facebook emerged. First of all that is not true, what you read on the internet is also called reading (it might not be a book per se, but you are getting educated by reading news, posts, etc.). However, if you really feel like your reading habits have reduced due to Facebook, then you are probably using it more than you should. When I said that Facebook is to be used wisely, this is partially what I meant. Remember, Facebook is a supplement, use it when you need it. For some that might be 5 minutes a day, some an hour a day, and some 3 hours. What matters is that while you are on Facebook you feel as though you are gaining something important; you are satisfied with how you are spending your time. If not, turn off that computer and do something else that is more useful and more gratifying.

The last point I want to discuss is the privacy issue that everyone is so afraid about. First, let’s put things in perspective, Facebook does NOT force you to post anything you don't want to other than your name (and even that, you can invent an alias). Whatever information you write can be used against or in favor of you, just like when you speak to someone on the street, make a presentation at a conference, or publish a paper. There is absolutely nothing different about Facebook when it comes to controlling what you say. As one of my primary teacher would say: “repeat what you are about to say 7 times in your head before saying it out loud”. Once you’ve made sure that it will have no or little repercussion, then you can say/post it.

It is true that Facebook uses your information to help advertisers know exactly what you like and what you are into. After all they need to make money, they can’t just give you a wonderful service for free and not get anything in return. If you owned Facebook, you’d do the same. They have employees to pay and maintenance fees like any other company.  So they can either charge us a fee to join Facebook, or use advertisements. I vote for the latter. Remember though, if you don't tell Facebook what you like, then they cannot tell their advertisers. So really in the end, it’s up to you.

There is a reason why Facebook is the world’s largest social media. If people really hated it, they will be off of it. So, to those of you who are not yet on Facebook, don’t wait another second to join—unless of course you don’t really care about connecting with friends who live far from you, or make more money for your business, or increase your knowledge. There are of course other ways to reach these goals, and if it is working sublimely for you, then definitely, no need for you to join. But if there is a slight doubt in your mind that maybe, just maybe you could make more money by using Facebook, or you could meet more people, or … Then Just use it wisely, and you’ll see the advantages in a few days.  

  

4 Reasons Why I Loved my Stay in Seattle

Seattle

I spent four days in Seattle, Washington, USA. True, not enough time to really know all about a city. But sometimes, a few days are all you need to grasp the main highlights of a place, and see if you love it or hate it... In my case, I loved Seattle. Other than the rain (yeah, it really rains all the time), it is a pretty cute city that has a lot to offer. I’d like to share the 4 main reasons that made my stay wonderful. And, if you ever plan to travel to Seattle, I recommend considering these points. 

1) WATERFRONT:  I have a theory: any city that has water (ocean, lake, river…) has the potential to be a great city. There is something about water that makes things feel like you are constantly on vacation. It smells watery, it feels good, and people seem happier. Seattle is no different. Surrounded by the Pacific Ocean, there are breathtaking sceneries from pretty much anywhere. It is truly a gem that everyone should discover. Funny thing is, I have a feeling that most Seattlers don’t go out to re-discover the beauty of their city… Please do!

At Kushi Bar

2) FOOD: If you can't afford to go to Asia, then go to Seattle for the best Chinese, Japanese, Thai or Vietnamese food. Succulent dishes, authentic taste, affordable price. While typing this, I'm almost drooling right now thinking about the delicious 'pho' I had at Thanh Vi (on Jackson Street and 12th Avenue): simply the best I've ever had... And don't even get me started on the 'okonomiyaki at Kushi Bar: Mmmmmmm... Also, the 'dim sums' at Jade Garden (in the International District) are to die for! I'm pretty sure I'll never taste anything this good, except perhaps if I go to the home of dim sums itself, in Guangdong (Southern China).

Space Needle

3) LANDMARKS:

From the Space Needle (which has appeared in many movies and TV shows), to the Seattle Center Monorail, the Smith Tower, the Washington Mutual Tower (Seattle's second tallest building), the Pike Place Market, the Fremont Troll, the Science Fiction Museum, and The Seattle Great Wheel… There it really something for everyone. And for those of you Starbucks lovers, its first store is at the Pike Place Market since it was founded in 1971 (and it looks exactly like it was back then).

4) MY HOSTS: Well, this was the climax of all. I stayed at one of my friends' and her fiancée’s. They are the most amazing hosts in the world (Yep! I said world). To be honest, even if my trip was in the most boring city, I'm pretty sure I'd have had an amazing time anyways with hosts like them. They were thoughtful, funny, easy-going, kind-hearted, considerate, loving... In fact, any other positive adjectives you can think of probably fits them. I've travelled a lot in my life, and I can confidently say that this is by far the best place I've stayed at. We spent hours laughing, talking about old times, baking (unsuccessfully but still… It’s the process that counts), cooking, shopping, visiting Seattle's landmarks, laughing some more... And laughing again… What a pleasure it was! 

Thank you for a lovely time guys!

Hence, my advice to you, future Seattle visitors, make sure to stay at a place where you’d feel welcomed. If not, by all means, stay in a hotel.

There is nothing that can ruin your vacation more than if you hate where you are staying. I'd give you the address of MY hosts/friends in Seattle, but I like them too much to share them with anyone else, haha!

A Response to Paulo Freire’s ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed'

Paulo Freire (1921-97) is known to be one of the leading educationalists of all time. Yet, his book ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’ (1970) goes beyond the field of education, addressing the social issues of the twentieth century—and perhaps of the twenty-first century as well. The present article is a response to that particular social concern that Freire denounces intensely, with harsh terms such as oppression, alienation, dehumanization, necrophilia, love of death, and the like.

In the first chapter of ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’, Freire places a good deal of emphasis on his desire for a just society that can restore the humanity that has been destroyed by capitalism. He argues against an oppressive system whereby the minority (the upper-class and/or policy-makers) dominates the lower-class by exploiting it on all levels. But, how can the oppressed be liberated? This is the core of Freire’s work in ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’. In fact, in his preface he states that what he hopes for his book to achieve is to enable humans to find the path to a world filled with love. For now, however, that love is shattered by an oppressive system that dehumanizes both the oppressor and the oppressed—considered ‘less humans’.

At first sight Freire’s views might seem exaggerated. After all, we live in a world that is much more human than it was centuries ago—where public execution, barbaric torture, or slavery were accepted, and even encouraged. Today, individuals are constantly given opportunities to rise in society, for example thanks to government bursaries given to students, or worldwide humanitarian agencies that help disadvantaged people. One can even point to the ‘American Dream’ that gives everyone the opportunity to prosper and move to achieve greater social mobility: a well-known example is Christopher Gardner, who went from sleeping in metro stations to becoming the CEO of his stockbrokerage firm.

For the reasons mentioned above—and many more—Freire’s belief in the existence of an oppressive society might not seem valid today. However, I believe that it is very much a reality. Perhaps it would be easier to see it in openly oppressed nations such as colonized countries that are still to this day suffering from the remnants of colonization. My own story can be a testimony to this. I went to a French catholic primary school in Senegal. Our teachers constantly used the banking education system that Freire condemns. No communication or dialogue was ever part of our teaching program. The teacher spoke, we listened. In fact we were brainwashed to believe that he knew it all but we knew nothing. Though the lessons we endured had nothing to do with our needs or interest, we had to memorize them or else be reprimanded. We were not allowed to speak our own dialects in class, but only French. In fact, for the most part, we were not allowed to speak at all: I remember vividly my teachers telling me “Mariam, tais-toi!” when I asked questions or raised my hand to participate. And if I did not keep quiet after that firm warning, I got punished. Like Freire stated, as students we were just objects instead of being subjects. And as we grew older, this brought about identity issues—the feeling of being below the French. Thirty-five years after colonization had ended, we were still victims of the French oppression.

This image is a perfect representation of the banking education system that Freire talks about. 

The teacher is a depositor and the student the depository.

Source: chattanoogacreek.utk.edu

For individuals who have not experienced such obvious oppression, Freire’s work may seem outdated—perhaps that is why his book is so much more prominent in South America, Asia and Africa than it is in Europe or North America.  This might also be the reason why I have heard several non-oppressed individuals say that they have a hard time understanding the language Freire’s uses in his book. However, I do not believe that language is the issue, rather the fact that the ideology of being oppressed is unfamiliar to them. Donald Macedo, a critical theorist from Cape Verde and professor of Liberal Arts and Education at the University of Massachusetts Boston, gives a perfect example: a 16 year-old oppressed African-American who perfectly understood Freire and is quoted as saying: “he [Freire] is talking about me” (as cited in Freire, 2000, p. 23), yet several graduate students in the West found it challenging to comprehend.

Now that I have illustrated that the oppressive system that Freire talked about in the 1970s is still valid today, let us look at it in more depth. Freire strongly believes that it is the role of the oppressed to stand up for their rights and dignity, and I completely agree with that. The oppressed are the ones who are suffering; hence they must struggle against the oppressive condition that exploits them. In order to do that, they first need to be aware that they are oppressed. Unfortunately, a large number of oppressed peoples do not know this. The Marxist theory of social class that Freire refers to by the term ‘false consciousness’, or as I like to call it ‘false reality’, illustrates how and why the oppressed are unaware (or in denial) of how subjugated they are. Although Marx never used the term ‘false consciousness’, he argued that individuals in the lower-class suffer from an obscured image of the reality around them. Thus, they cannot comprehend how exploited they are (Eyerman, 1981; Little, n.d). A mental construct is set in their mind that positions themselves in a particular class in society. They believe that they have to assume the roles of that class, and nothing more. This reminds me of an anecdote that happened when I was in Ethiopia this winter. Our housemaid had prepared a traditional meal called alicha wot. As I tasted it, I found that it was too strong for me, so I told her “There is too much cumin and turmeric in this”. She replied, “Really? Okay, I will put less next time. I am just a maid what do I know?” It is only after reading Freire that I realized how ridiculous my comment was, and how incorrect her response was. She had been eating and cooking this meal for over 25 years and I hadn’t lived in Ethiopia for 10 years. Of course she had more experience than I had in the field, yet her social status made her believe that I, the oppressor, knew more than her. This is a case in point of false consciousness.

Other than false consciousness there is another major cause that prevents the oppressed from freeing themselves: fear of freedom. Today, we live in a more globalized world, where information exchange is fast and relatively easy, and the oppressed can find out if and how they are exploited. What is holding them back is the risk that fighting back will bring. As Freire (1970) clearly puts it “While dominated by the fear of freedom they refuse to appeal to others or to listen to the appeal of others […] they prefer the security of conformity with their state of unfreedom”. Example of these are the several countries in this world that have been dominated by the same oppressive government for years. The people of these nations are widely aware of the authoritative system that is ignoring their rights, but they are frightened to seek freedom. That fear comes from the fact that they might be killed or imprisoned for their actions if they were to revolt. Hence, they rather remain in the refuge of unfreedom.

Only after false consciousness and fear of freedom fade can a movement toward liberation take place. Freire emphasizes that that drive can only originate from the force of the oppressed because they are the ones situated in the weak position. The oppressors, on the other hand, are not in the right state of mind to change. For the most part, they are comfortable in their exploitation of the oppressed; this way they can achieve and retain their power. Furthermore, they are blinded by authority and have no wish to see things alter. The few oppressors that want to break the system will be unsuccessful as their actions are merely example of what Freire calls ‘false generosity’. Indeed, any oppressor who humbly wishes to put a stop to the oppressive system does it either because he feels pity for the oppressed individuals, because he believes that he should ‘give back’ to the community (religious/spiritual motive), because he wants to be seen as a philanthropist (a marketing strategy), or worst, to keep oppressed peoples oppressed by making them dependent on aid (egoistic reasons). These false generosities will not revolutionize the oppressive system; they will only conceal the root issue. The multitudes of humanitarian agencies in the world are direct examples of false generosity. When a wealthy woman opens a school in a poor neighborhood to supposedly help disadvantaged children have the chance to attend school, she is acting in false generosity—knowingly or unconsciously. Those children will most probably learn through the banking approach of education and be indoctrinated by the ideology of the oppressor anyways. This correlates with what Randall Collins argues in agreement with Marxist’s social conflict theory. Collins (1993) states that one of the main issues in society is the fact that schools are controlled by the dominant class that forces its values to be accepted by students. This is exactly what false generosity does in the oppressive system. True generosity, on the other hand, would strive to address the main problem, which is to directly involve the oppressed in decision-making, to communicate, to have a problem-posing education system. For that, Freire argues that the oppressed peoples are the ones who must help themselves by revolutionizing for their freedom. This is the reality of any major revolution that has taken place in the world. No successful revolution has ever emerged from the oppressor, but rather from the oppressed: Rosa Parks, often referred to as the ‘the mother of the freedom movement’, is known to have played a major role in the Civil Rights Movement for instance. Nelson Mandela is another example of an oppressed man who fought for racial equality despite the fact that he was imprisoned for 20 years. Mahatma Gandhi, who peacefully protested for civil rights and freedom, not only in India but across the world is another example. The common denominator of these revolutionaries (and many others, such as the 2012 student protesters in Quebec or the 2010 Tunisian rioters who brought democratization) is that they were oppressed, and through their movements, other oppressed people followed their paths, and then justice was born. A proof that liberation can only come from the oppressed, and not from the oppressor.

Once the oppressed individuals fight for their liberation and are successful, the next issue to tackle is to avoid the trap of becoming the oppressor. Unfortunately, far too often, former oppressed peoples become the oppressors when they are in power. Therefore, Freire is right to present this warning. A point in case of the oppressed becoming oppressor is the story of the former Libyan leader, Muammar al-Gaddafi. He was a revolutionary (an oppressed) who took power over King Idris I, who Gaddafi saw as his oppressor. Once in power, Gaddafi became a dictator who oppressed anyone who questioned him. Eventually, the people he was tyrannizing ended up oppressing him by brutally beating him to death in 2011. This example is not unique. Almost every nation in the world has had a similar occurrence at some point in history.

So far, I have illustrated my agreement with Freire’s work in ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’ by giving concrete examples related to the remarks he made. Nevertheless, there are a few limitations that I would like to call attention to. The first is that Freire seems to see the world as black or white; you are either an oppressor or an oppressed. In my opinion, this is a simplistic view of the situation. I believe that some people are neither oppressed nor oppressors. Also, one can be both an oppressed and an oppressor, as the anecdotes I mentioned earlier illustrated: I was oppressed in a French school, but an oppressor to my housemaid. How does liberation work in this case? One cannot liberate oneself from oppression while at the same time dominating someone else. Second, for a person who criticizes propaganda and banking education, Freire’s text itself seems like propaganda. He is clearly telling us what to do. His text is a call to action. Even though, for the most part, I agreed with Freire’s statements, I could not stop thinking that someone who is in disagreement might feel oppressed or be defensive after reading his book. Third, the idea that society can be human (in Freire’s definition) is simply impossible because as humans we are all different. We come from different cultural backgrounds, have different financial capacity, have different intellectual competences, and face different issues in life. There is simply no way that we can all agree on what is oppressing and what is benefiting. Social class is a representation of how different we are as humans; getting rid of them would mean being exactly the same people, which is impossible. Although I agree with Freire on how unjust our society is, unlike him I do not believe that we can be one big happy family. Besides, even if we tried, we would be unsuccessful because banking education starts at home—not at school as Freire states. There is authority in the family; our parents are our first oppressors: “eat this”, “go to bed”, “don’t do that”, “be quiet”… In my opinion, Freire failed to look at that aspect. He blamed schools for oppressing us, when in reality we are oppressed as well at home, at work, and by the media. This brings me to my last disagreement with Freire’s work on his remarks about the banking approach of education. Do I believe that banking education is not a successful technique? Yes, to a certain extent, it is true that it does not involve or interest students. It makes them objects instead of active participants of their lives. However, as a teacher and a student, I also know that focusing solely on problem-posing education cannot work. Some courses, such as algebra, require the student to follow a certain rule in order to solve the problem. If she does not know the rule, she will not find the solution. History is another example of a course that requires students to be silent and listen. If they were not born in the 1940s, for instance, how would they know about World War II, if their teacher did not tell them? A student can only be critical and engage in dialogue after she is aware of the details of the topic at hand. The only way she can be aware of those is through reading or quietly listening to what her teachers/parents tell her. For these reasons, problem-solving education alone cannot work. Besides, students are not all the same; some are more comfortable with active participation, while other prefer to sit and listen.

A lot more can be said about Freire’s ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’. I chose to focus mainly on the oppressor/oppressive social issue that he presents. Nevertheless, it is essential to remember that social issues are directly linked to education because: 1. We spend about 15 to 25 years of our lives in school (so our social life is formed there) and 2. Teachers have the power to shape students’ thoughts, and thus change society.

References

Collins, R. (1993). What does conflict theory predict about America’s future? Sociological

                     Perspectives, 36(4), 289-313.

          Eyerman, R. (1981). False consciousness and ideology in Marxist theory. Acta Sociologica,

                             24(3), 43-56. 

                   Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Herder and Herder.

                   Freire, P (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary edition). New York, NY:          

                            Continuum.

Little, D. (n.d.). False consciousness. University of Michigan-Dearborn. Retrieved on

                   February 6, 2013 from http://www- 

                   personal.umd.umich.edu/~delittle/iess%20false%20consciousness%20V2.htm