Grand Theft Popculture

gta5-wallpaper

Rockstar’s latest addition to its family of crime simulation video games.

 

Grand Theft Auto 5, a satirical representation of everything our society was, is, and will continue to be. The game began to make its mark on pop-culture late 2013, but I didn’t get to grasp what the game truly meant because PC users, like me, could not get their hands on it until mid 2015. Immediately after purchasing it I was astonished to discover that the game was three times the memory size of even the newest games on the market. After the download completed I soon came to realize that GTA5 was more than just another crime simulation video game.

Along with all the components that create a “good” video game, Rockstar Games created something more: a satirical mockery of society as we know it. Is the game grotesquely dark and disturbing? Yes, but so is society. As you play the game, you are constantly reminded of how GTA5 makes fun of the world we live in. Putting the devil in the details is just how Rockstar points at you and screams, “This is how fucked up your society is,” and they are right. The game refuses to cut corners in its imitation of our social experience; advertisements and radio dialogue, reality shows and sports, clothes and cars, reactions and interactions are heavily incorporated during your time within the city and surrounding area of Los Santos (analogous to Los Angeles).

At first I was amazed by the level at which detail appeared in this simulation of social life. During a ‘stakeout mission’ I found a Cola truck (Rockstars Coke replacement) to follow my target. While trying to find a contact in my in-game phone, I got distracted and started to play a game on the in-game internet. I even got side-tracked trying to beat a triathlete at a race. Then I started to listen and watch; picking up on the even finer details, I realized that GTA5 touched on some of the greater social issues of our time (most of which people are too afraid to acknowledge). Through the lenses of three unique characters, woven into a grander narrative, I was granted the ability to at least witness the simulation of age, gender, race, and social class in our society through different perspectives. Are these portrayals politically correct? No, but they show you the dark gritty truth behind a satirical mask. Although the face value of GTA5 is only a crime simulation, underneath the skin it is an absurdly accurate representation of our society’s terrifying nature. To do this, the game makes us step into the shoes of three unique characters.

 

The Cast of Grand Theft Auto V

actual_1372790970

Franklin uses his repossession job as a way to legitimize getting out of the ‘hood’.

 

Meet Franklin Clinton, a 25 year-old, african-american male, lower-middle class, and repo-agent/gang banger. With one goal in mind, Franklin will do anything to get himself out of the hood. Franklin has realized that the gang-banging days are long behind him, hence the repossession job, and so he is searching for a way to make his way in the world. While money does not seem to be an issue, the house that he shares with his aunt, Denise, is in the middle of a poor neighborhood. The repossession job seems to keep Franklin financially afloat, but his economic progress is stagnant. Franklin meets Michael De Santa, after a failed repossession of Jimmy De Santa’s car, and instead of reprimanding Franklin, Michael decides to take the kid under his wing. Thus begins the complicated relationship between an ex-gang banger and an ex-bank robber; one is trying to escape the hood and one is trying to escape his family. However, GTA, satirically mirroring the racial stigmas of real life, portrays Franklin’s existence as a permanent struggle to reap the rewards he has earned. His success does not seem to get him anywhere, and no matter how hard he works, he risks getting screwed over. The people he surrounds himself with, such as his Lamar Davis and his repo-employer Simeon Yetarian, are all struggling with the same thing. Lamar, stagnant in his gang-banging ways, is just making his way in the world, but is confused how Franklin is going to get out of the hood if he turns away from his old life. Simeon, a somewhat cut-throat car-dealer, seems to be successful, but he is always going on about how he needs to protect his investments. It seems that the individuals surrounding Franklin cannot escape the lower class system of financial oppression. Further along in the narrative, even when Franklin seems to be on the brink of achieving his goal, a corporate business man, Devin Weston, recruits Franklin to boost a set of expensive cars. This task is alarmingly similar to his repo-job; Franklin is heard complaining about the two job’s similarities. It seems that the city of Los Santos is against Franklin, but is this a coincidence or a conniving way Rockstar shows us the life of inner city society?

franklin_and_the_groove_street_families

Franklin with fellow gang-bangers, Lamar and Stretch.

 

The other protagonists in GTA5 are white, but Franklin offers us the far more interesting perspective of a black male trying to make it in a white world. This is not a new perspective for Rockstar to portray; however, it has never been put side by side with the white perspective that is often presented to us through the media. Franklin is a skeptical character, often reluctant to take on jobs and be apart of his friends’ schemes; Michael, society’s white upper-class representation, seems to be the only person Franklin puts trusts into. Lamar and Denise accuse Franklin of neglecting the “families”, or the hood community, after he starts to work with Michael to escape poverty.  To Franklin, the world is against him, and for the most part he is right because he gets screwed over by friend and foe alike. Lamar constantly recruits Franklin for jobs that go bad, and their acquaintance, Harold “Stretch” Joseph, knowingly leads the two friends into unwanted danger.  Franklin is not only oppressed within the GTA5 narrative, but also within the game play itself. The “Franklin Conspiracy” is a subtle phenomenon that occurs if the player chooses to roam the streets of Los Santos as Franklin. While it is normal for police to respond to criminal behavior in-game, it is quite strange when the police force responds more aggressively toward the black protagonist. In some instances the police will try to arrest you for merely interacting with them. Rockstar studios denied the inclusion of racist cops in the game, but both anecdotal and statistical accounts have shown that the in-game cops respond according to the area the characters find themselves in. Whether this is an accidental mistake or a purposeful representation of real life statistics, GTA5 demonstrates police profiling of not only minorities, but also the impoverished.

maxresdefault

Franklin helps Beverly expose celebrities’ dark secrets to the masses.

 

Franklin’s experience is somewhat preoccupied with representing the black male stereotype, but there is still more than enough room for the misogynistic issues of our society. Throughout the narrative, Franklin struggles to maintain, or even avoid, a few relationships with female characters. His ex-girlfriend, Tanisha, embodies someone who has found a way out of the criminality of the hood; she is in the process of marrying a doctor. Additionally, Denise, his aunt that shares a ‘safe house’ with him, hates Franklin, banning him from the house when she is partaking in any of her spiritual activities. Often found partaking in spiritual walks and chants, Denise identifies herself as a ‘new-age-feminist’ and surrounds herself with female friends that spiritually embrace their female sexuality. The two characters represent very different stereotypes, but they belong to the same social class demographic. This scenario is quite confusing because Denise’s lifestyles are somewhat parallel to those of Amanda De Santa, an upper-class white woman. The in-game universe is obviously using Denise to satirically represent a certain stereotype, but Franklin more or less disregards her as an annoying object to deal with. Here is where it gets interesting, Franklin happens upon a man named Beverly Felton whose primary occupation is exposing celebrities. For whatever reason (most likely cash) Franklin decides to help Beverly with his quest to obtain and publish stories, with an exaggerated quality, relatable to what we see on the cover of People magazine. However, these “missions” predominantly target female celebrities undergoing idiotic or sexual behaviors; parallels can be drawn from real world celebrity drama on TV and magazines and the in-game missions Franklin is participating in.

v_michael_with_sign_1280x1024

Michael practically lives in a Rockstar’s version of Hollywood.

 

Meet Michael De Santa (formerly Michael Townley), a 45 year-old white male, upper class, ex-bank robber extraordinaire. With a dark past behind him, Michael is under witness protection by the FIB (you guessed it, Rockstar’s play on the FBI) which involved faking his own death. That aside, he is an upper class citizen with the property, house, and cars to prove it. However, GTA5 decides to contrast the glamour with the dysfunctional family of his spouse Amanda, his teenage son Jimmy, and his teenage daughter Tracey. Amanda cheats on him, Jimmy spends his days playing video games and smoking weed, and Tracey will do anything, sexual favors included, to become famous. Naturally, Michael, missing the thrill of crime, is pushed back into his former occupation. The narrative is clearly outlined through a subtle pop-culture reference: the therapist that Michael meets to cope with his life. Ironically, as Michael releases his feelings, his therapist deflects questions with reminders about rates, seemingly uninterested with his patient. Thus, Michael satirically portrays the quintessential upper class white male, excluding the whole criminal mastermind part.

500px-desantahouse-gtav-exterior

White privilege is reflected through Michael’s wealth and property

 

Race is a mediated substance of our society, prevalent in everyone’s everyday life. Michael’s lack of interaction with race is incredibly unnerving, especially when compared to the other character’s experiences. Aside from interacting with his partner in training and destroying a mexican cartel boss’ house, Michael has the privilege not to interact with many minorities. Why? Well, because Michael’s racial and socio-economic standing allows him to. An upper class white male is among the upper echelon of society, therefore, he has the money and social standing to propagate the idea that other races belong to lower echelons of society. Does Michael actively support this subtly racist lifestyle? No, but by being a benefiting bystander he is supporting the fundamentally racist attitude of the white upper-class. Upon closer inspection, all of the racially diverse characters that are financially successful in Los Santos have made their money through illicit means. An accidental coincidence, or a calculated imitation of popular perception of minorities? I am going to assume that Rockstar was well aware of  pop-culture’s perception of the relationship between race and money.

maxresdefault1

Amanda’s yoga classes are somewhat harmless, but can become quite sexual.

 

Michael’s interaction with race seems somewhat limited, but his various family members produce more than enough interactions with society’s stereotypical image of women. Michael’s wife and daughter both portray characters that take on a very sexual role in the world around them. Amanda had to leave her stripping and prostitution career behind when Michael went into witness protection. In response to Michael forcing her to leave her old life, she resents him and surrounds herself with hypersexualized male “trainers” (she is found cheating on Michael with her tennis instructor). The relationship between the two adults feeds into the kids lives. Tracey, Michael’s daughter, is obsessed with becoming famous. Her main scheme to achieve such a status is through the reality television show Fame or Shame (Similar to America’s Got Talent). It seems innocent, but as the narrative plays out, Tracey finds herself in the hands of sexually exploitative situations to reach her goal. The female characters around Michael  often have shallow single tracked personalities. Michael does not support the sexual objectification of his family members, but the world of GTA draws upon these stereotypes, reminding us how the media portrays women. The surrounding areas of Los Santos are ripe with these satirical representations of how society views women. Now of course these exaggerated representations are misogynistic and sexist, but if you take a step outside of the game, many parallels can be drawn from the real world. Once again, this is Rockstar’s world, but Rockstar chose to model it after our world.

official-artwork-trevor-yellow-jack-inn

Unlike Michael, Trevor never turned away from a life of crime and violence.

 

Meet Trevor Phillips, a 40ish year-old, white lower class male, ex-bank robber and CEO of Trevor Phillips Enterprises (a drug smuggling operation, and no, not the clever kind like in Breaking Bad). With a psychotic and unpredictable behavior, Trevor gives the game a perspective like no other. He was on the path to becoming a military pilot, but was judged as ‘mentally unfit’ and discharged accordingly. Now, with the bank robbing days behind him, he resides in the dirt poor redneck town of Sandy Shores (outside of Los Santos), running a small, but very aggressive drug operation. Trevor enters the narrative at a somewhat late stage, but when he enters Rockstar ups the ante of GTA from absurdly offensive, to terrifyingly disgusting. Trevor breaks down any political correctness still left in GTA. He is racist, misogynistic, violent, and worst of all manipulative. His “friends”, that he manipulates to achieve his goal of money and power, are Ron Jakowski, Wade and Floyd Hebert. All three of Trevor’s “friends” are manipulated by fear and violence to help him expand his “company”. Cracking disgusting and absurd jokes, Trevor is not afraid of the authorities, death, or any obstacle standing between him and power. By far, he is one of the most controversial portrayals of white trash hillbillies present in the media.

gtav2

Trevor’s involvement with the Civic Border Patrol is brief but dangerous for any nearby minorities.

 

There are few words that can describe Trevor’s abhorrent racism, but perhaps Rockstar designed his personality with non-relatability in mind. Throughout the narrative and Trevor’s personal experiences, we witness the racist mind of a psychotically violent redneck. He constantly refers to minorities as lesser than himself, all the while using them to help flourish TP Enterprises. This is to be expected from a character like this, but not all his racism turns to violence. When Trevor finally steps into the narrative alongside his two other partners, he meets Franklin, whom he tries to befriend because he is jealous of Michael’s relationship with the kid. As I said before, Trevor is manipulative, but when it comes to social interaction, he culturally appropriates himself with Franklin’s “black” life-styles. This interaction is done with little more than small sound bites conversation, but naturally, Franklin does not respond with arms wide open to accept Trevor’s attempt at friendship. The other interesting run-in Trevor has with his good buddy racism is his participation in the ‘Civil Border Patrol’ (A neighborhood watch for anyone that hates immigrants). Joe and Josef (the latter being and speaking Russian) ask Trevor to help them keep ‘America free of “illegal” immigrants’. Naturally, Trevor accepts and a string of ‘run-down and detain missions’ ensues, despite his semi-Canadian nationality. Here is the catch, Trevor (and the player guiding him) never sees what happens to these “illegal” immigrants; later on during this miniature story arc Trevor encounters one of the detained “immigrants”. The “immigrant’s” family turns out to have been in America for over 200 years. Outraged, our psychotic white trash redneck tracks down and kills Joe and Josef. Despite being a stone-cold psychotic killer, Trevor still has a little room in his heart for right and wrong, too bad he does not use this intuition where it counts.

maxresdefault2

Trevor has no respect for successful women with high authority.

 

Michael’s character has been focused on gender, while Franklin’s on race, but now we see how Trevor represents both sides of what society has to offer. Still incredibly racist, Trevor is also an incredibly disgusting misogynist and sexist, treating women like objects that he can toy with. The first scene that reintroduces our beloved redneck, is a feud between Trevor and another man over a woman. Both parties refer to the woman as theirs, objectifying her existence, but more disturbingly Trevor decides to kill the man and leave the woman to mourn over him. With no regard to humanity, Trevor encounters Wade’s cousin, Floyd, who has found himself in a relationship with an ultra-controlling girlfriend named Debra. During most of the narrative Debra is away for work, but Floyd is left alone with their house and Trevor’s influence. While Trevor is decisively using Floyd’s connections to increase TP Enterprises fortune, he is also convincing Floyd that Debra’s influence is degrading his manhood.  Debra fits the bill as a stereotypical successful business woman, and we get to see just how much of a control fanatic she is when she returns to find that Trevor has ransacked her home. Trevor is not only objectifying and degrading about the way he sees people, he is also outspoken and quite blatant about his under-educated redneck opinions. Although mostly every situation with Trevor exemplifies the latter, it is especially clear when he expresses his sexual appeal for Molly Schultz, vice president of Devin Weston Holdings. Molly is partner to Devin Weston, CEO executive with extra-legal abilities, and is a very powerful character. Like most powerful female characters, Molly lacks some feminine behavior, which directly conflicts with Trevor’s view of her as a sexual object. While Molly rejects his sexual advances, Trevor’s actions speak louder than words for how this miniature scenario reflects the broader subject of our patriarchal society. It seems Rockstar has modeled Trevor’s character after the worst of the worst society has to offer on the subject of race and gender.

 

What does this mean?

6simxxietb4j-878x0-z-z96kyq

Satirical awareness campaign or Rockstars exploitation of society’s power complex and feedback loop?

 

Grand Theft Auto 5 has received critical acclaim and debasement for being an excellent game and an unacceptable politically incorrect message. The issue is that both parties are ignoring Rockstars success in creating a satirical representation of society (more specifically of Californian culture). Among all GTA5’s controversies, there are parallels that can be drawn between the game’s portrayal of our world and the actual behavior of our society. The game does this through exaggerated satirical content that has the potential to raise awareness through being offensive and insensitive to everyone (similar to the content of shows like South Park). However, has Rockstar Games gone too far? When does a satirical representation cease to stand out, becoming part of society’s feedback loop? With over 200 million copies sold, I struggle with being comfortable that the people owning the game realize the issues it raises. A quick surf of the web confirms my suspicions; people do not take GTA5 for more than its face value. Its fans defend it as just another game for older audiences, but others fight back saying its racist, sexist and more. Both of these shallow interpretations hold truth, but the reality of it is that the Rockstar has made the game into something worthy of deeper criticism.

Rockstar Games has created a masterpiece of satirical content mocking our society. Not only have they channeled it through a specific form of entertainment (video games), they have been incredibly successful at selling it. The question is why? Why do the people buy a product that makes fun of them? If there is anything that should be gathered from the game, it is that we should look closer at our society. However, this is not the reality. The reality is that while Rockstar has created a masterful piece of satirical entertainment, it also feeds on consumerism. GTA5 allows the player to experience the monstrosity of societal effects, but it also grants them the power to ignore the consequences, the messages, and the awareness of such a society. While Rockstar is just trying to sell its game, consequently, the world of GTA does not force the player to think about the implications of Los Santos, let alone the player’sreality. GTA5 will point its finger and laugh at the world we live in, urging you to do the same, but it offers no more than that. The consequence of this is that the satirical representations in the game are projected onto real life and added into a satirical feedback loop.

The purpose of a satirical representation, a spoof on society, is to look at the issues, controversies, and imperfections that occur with our daily lives. Upon closer inspection, the parallels we can draw between the world we live in and the simulated experience of GTA is frightening to say the least. It is no wonder that people react negatively to a source of entertainment that satirically commentates the social experience. It is not the purposeful representation of sexism, racism, and classism that we should worry about. We should be worried about the truth that the representation carries with it. The lack of people that respond with this realization is the reason that politically incorrect messages get inserted into the societal feedback loop. Grand Theft Auto 5 is just another video game to some, or the culmination of societal bigotry to others, but the overall extracted message should be much more. While the franchise must keep the name of Grand Theft Auto to sell its copies, Rockstar has stolen more than just a car from society. They have committed Grand Theft Pop-culture.

An Island of Many Homes

The island, a home at the end of a road. When society impoverishes those who cannot follow the social standards of success, the “end-of-the-roaders” make their home away from the eyes of society. These are the people that live dollar-to-dollar day by day, economically stagnant within poverty. On the island, these are the people who heat their houses with their ovens; they pay for utilities and food by striking deals of cheap servitude out of desperation. If they are lucky enough to own a vehicle, it is found on the side of the road more often than rolling down it. You will find them paying for their cup of coffee with a smile and a promise to pay next time, rather than the spare change not to be found in their pockets. They are the lobsterman’s sternmen, the hotel’s dishwashers, the shops cardboard stackers, doing the dirty jobs that nobody pays enough for. Scraping the bottom of the barrel, the “end-of-the-roaders” have nowhere else to go other than their decaying house sitting next to a million dollar estate. Yet, they hide themselves in plain sight, shoulder to shoulder with wealthy vacationers and successful businessmen. There is no ghetto, no fence, no economic enforcement separating the impoverished and the wealthy, yet the segregation of social class persists not through physical means but through the ignorance supported by society.

The island, a home to a social image. It is no longer a place to hide, a place to work, a place of emotion, or a place of aesthetic value. When houses are bought and sold for more money than the net worth of the island’s working class, it becomes something of a social phenomenon. The houses are vacant throughout most of the year, but everyone knows who owns them. The names turn up in conversations at the side of the road, rumors spread throughout coffee shops, and amongst the artists staying at hotels. The names of the wealthy become mythological icons rather than the people they belong to. These “icons” can call upon their servants, the lower echelons of society, with ease, to do whatever they desire. During the limited time that the “icons” show their faces on the island, they are seen participating in social life like anyone else. However, it is them that start the conversations, the gatherings, the parties, in order to maintain a social image. The wealthy are the ones who have built and maintained the hegemonic social hierarchy dictating social class. They possess the luxury to breach and build social barriers between the social classes they control. People are in awe at their wealthy presence, but only because these “icons” have valued the lower social classes as less.

The island, a home to aesthetic pleasure. Every tourist destination comes with a demographic of people that visit for the exotic scenery. There is always more than meets the eye, except to the people who can afford to only look at the surface of a place. The culture, the people, and the essence of the place are ignored by the vacationers who can afford just the aesthetic value of the island. These are the people that the working class serves because the nicer the workers look, the more willing the “aesthetic vacationers” will empty their pockets. Perhaps these people will invest emotionally in the island, but for now they might as well vacation elsewhere. The island might as well be a painting, and the people with it are objects to be used to enhance their experience. The “aesthetic vacationers” walk down the road as if everything will get out of their way. Society has given these people almost anything they could ask for and so they do not question the position of their social class. The island is their resort, a place to take a break from the “real world”; a place that can be rented, bought, and even sold. However, they come and go, these people do not stay long because the place holds no more value than their next vacation destination.

The island, a home to tradition. Those lucky enough to move away and discover better opportunities are bounded by a tradition to return to the island’s rocky shores. They are family, friends, and simple tourist alike, but they always have and always will find their way back to the island. While these “traditionalists” are of the working class elsewhere, the island is the one luxury they might be able to afford. Maybe they have managed to earn a little more than the island’s working class, but they the humblest of vacationers, understanding the hard work at hand to make their stay comfortable. The “traditionalist” blend amongst social classes, balancing on the image of their social class and their need to connect with the island. They are found amongst the wealthy at wine and cheese parties, amongst the vacationers talking over cups of coffee, and amongst workers loading the ferries. A social contract limits them to the interactions they have with the different social classes. The workers see them as more successful, lucky that their last hand brought them fortune; while the wealthy see that beyond the island, the “traditionalists” are just successful servants.

The island, a home to economic opportunity. The working class, the ones who have been dealt an unlucky hand at a high stakes game of societal poker, take all work that is decent enough to make ends meet. Society has not rejected these people, instead the working class has come to the island to find financial opportunities; of which there are many. They are behind the counter, waiting, serving on those with money enough to afford the services. The better the bluff the larger the pot; they smile up to the wealthier social classes pretending to be content to receive a bigger reward. It is a broad spectrum of people that work on the island for their wealth, hoping to be dealt a better hand. These are the restaurant and hotel workers, the fishermen, the luggage transporters, the landscapers, the caretakers, the carpenters, the knick knack snack shop employees, the entrepreneurs and business owners; all making the most of the wealthy exploitative vacationers, who step off the ferry to enjoy their time away from society’s eyes. Ironically, it is the people of wealth that bring social stigma that binds the working class. These are the people that stress, sweat, and sometimes bleed for their way of life. There is no point to move away because it is the same anywhere else for the working class. They smile and serve, knowing that in the end they are being cheated of their freedom, but they know it is the only way to sustain their way of life.

An island to many, but a home to few. People come, and people go, seeking to separate themselves from the “real” world. However, it is not the world they need to separate from. It is the social isolation, carried with them, that people are trying to escape.

Our White World

Let us make America great again! It’s a phrase that we have been listening to for as long as time has tested our great nation; now it is slandered across the media as Donald Trump’s promise to America. Before you decide, dear reader, to leap up out of glee or even contempt of the patriotic statement, sit down and listen to the absurdities of this promise.

In our white world the capital A of America, represents everything the United States was, is, and will be. Yes, I am talking about the not-so-innocent nickname our country is known to the world. Little nicknames have a big effect, altering your perception of what the nation, in this case, represents to the world. Thus, people go around redefining the world to represent their own interests; the United States of America has been sliced down to the simple, humble, great America. The names given to the world and everything in it comes a weight of a story that we force them to bare. Oh, but how could simple vibrations through air be so heavy? The bigger the stone you throw in the pond the bigger the splash and the farther the ripples will travel. It just so happens that the all the white people in our white world are so far from the stone they cast that they do not even notice the ripples. Thus is the nature of calling our beloved country “America”, a giant stone cast too far away for us to see those who are amongst the splash.

Allow me to introduce the first obvious problem, what is America? America has become a term so twisted and contorted that the meaning of it has been tainted by popular perception. The United States geographically makes up one half of North America, the other half shared with Canada. coupled with South America. Together the two continents make up America, the New World to the white men who stole or “colonized” the new land. Well white privilege came, saw, and conquered the western world; taking the land and the name that came with it. America represents every white value that we hold dear! Is this the white power that neo-nazis run around self-proclaiming? Well, no, it is worse. Neo-nazis can be cast aside as ridiculous, radical, and extreme because Hitler offed himself well over half a century ago. The proclamations of America have institutionalized white privilege. It has communicated to the world that we are entitled to a name that should represent more people than just the whiteness of the United States of America.

In our white world the United States’ persona as“America” discludes anyone that does not belong to the race that conquered it! Therefore, the very essence of labeling the United States as “America” is racist. Are we really “the land of the free and the home of the brave”? Ask any slave, indentured servant, internment camp occupant, or ghetto resident how they feel about the white proclamations of America. We are not the “land of opportunity”, where one’s hard work pays off. The American Dream is an ideal made by white people, for white people! To defend your great “America” you point at the non-white hands made successful by their hard work, but your attempt to redeem your great nation is in vain. Throughout our nation’s brief spec among human history, white hands have exploited colored hands to build a nation of white values. Even today it is more difficult for those colored hands reap the benefits of their work because they cannot meet the white criterion of the American Dream. “America”, along with its dream,  embodies the white values, privilege, and power that conquered the New World.

Allow me to introduce the second obvious problem, what is greatness? We are told to make America great again, but how should that be interpreted? When was “America” ever great through the eyes of the rest of the world? What is the meaning of “great” in the context of the world? America’s “greatness” is absent from its past. Our independence was founded on the basis that everyone had an equal say in their governance, but still this excluded women and any other person of non-european descendancy. When our civil war freed the slaves, oppression persisted through the segregation of racial communities. Anti semitism sparked from the great depression, and after a hundred years, men finally decided to allow white women to vote. Following the Second World War internment camps and a cold war fought on Asian soils, America once again confronted its racial hierarchy during the Civil Rights movement. With the events of 9/11 the racial focuses of American thought were recentered on the middle east. Despite all the progress that has been made, still America is struggling with racial oppression, yet it continues to call its past “great”.

In our white world, we are the ones who self-proclaim our own greatness; forgetting those who suffer because of it. How could the short glorious life span of the United States ever be the greatness we seek? Ironically, the past that we call upon is richer with racist intentions than the white American exceptionalism claimed as our identity. To be blunt, we have bleached our past and greatness to be white. The racist stains of our ancestry are no longer clear to us because of the hegemonic ideals that America represents. We have forgotten those who have suffered to make America into the “greatness” it claims to be! So when you wave your flag and demand we make America great again, you are instead asking us to make America white again.

Allow me to introduce the third obvious problem, who are we? Who is demanding that we make America great again? Have you wondered who does “us” refer to? Who makes “America” great?  Why it referencing those who self-proclaim it! It is a white promise preached by white prophets served to please our white world. Us, or the white hands who stole, conquered, built, and empowered a nation built on the foundation of freedom? You see, to those who do not have white hands, America’s past is one of oppression rather than greatness. Calling upon America’s past as desirable is neglecting to remember the suffering that colored-hands endured by their white oppressors. Calling upon “us” to restore American greatness is calling upon white privilege to resurrect the blatancy of what it once was!

In our white world, we lead ourselves through a vicious cycle of segregation oppressing American ideals. I spit at those who forget their own past, pretending as if America’s “greatness” bares no blemishes. Greatness is not building walls. Greatness is not turning away from those seeking refuge. Greatness is not accusing crimes on impoverished people’s racial criminality. So wake up America, wake up people who support the white privilege, blind to its own past. Wake up to the dark present and even darker past of America’s greatness. To those who keep the white, the light, the purity of the past, shed the guise and wake up to your racist intentions. Let us make America great again? No, I scream back! Let us move beyond our past and refute those who wish to build walls between our white world and the people of America.

Mocking A Culture that Pretends to Be Aware

In your little part of the world, wherever you may be, there is just too much for you to do. Yet, you, a singular person, are still concerned with problems much bigger than yourself. But to what avail? It is quite comical, watching you flounder around and between. The newspaper, internet, and the newest scholarly articles assure you that, whatever the problem is, “someone” is doing “something”. But “you” are the one, naive and privileged, who fabricates the issue’s importance! Once you have found something, to sooth your nerves, assuring you that the world is not as bad as you think it is, you become distracted by the more personal tasks of everyday life. You have done your reading, your research, and perhaps even some of your own writing. Are you now aware, or just pretending? What happens when these problems’ roots grow so thick, so deep, into our own society? Is there almost no chance to uproot them? Maybe you are asking yourself, what could be so wrong with our society? Well, our society that we hold so dear, has built itself upon the injustice of gender and racial hierarchies. Outraged? I am. Want to do anything about it? I do. However, in your attempt to comprehend these “new” societal issues, you realize, you are the problem! Yet we continue to pretend that there is an end goal, a solution to these societal issues; if we dedicate our lives to these goals, we will reach them.

Now we encounter the silly notion of the American Dream. If anyone works hard enough they can get what they want, even if it means upturning a whole society to equalize the hierarchical madness. This value is weightless, an absurd lie! The American Dream applies to one demographic of people: white men. Thus, it is the white men sitting at the top that have the ability to change the way the hierarchy is stacked. Still, we go about our days, we talk of injustice, and we try to find an instantaneous solution. All the while we feed societal structures; all our little actions and words add up to something greater than ourselves: oppression. Is there a solution? No! The cancer that is our society may be visible, but it cannot be cut out. We must have a willingness toward change and the ability to be aware that every little action could help the very cancer that we are attempting to treat grow.

This is where my secret comes out to my dear reader. I am white, and I am a man, privileged enough to say these things and not be questioned because of what I identify as. A handful of days before these words appeared here, our beloved United States spent a day to remember the Civil Rights leader Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. While most of the nation slept, enjoying a long weekend, the institution I attend hosted mandatory workshops to raise our awareness. An awareness of what you ask? An awareness of our social hierarchy, the very hierarchy Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and many others, tried to dethrone. Some students didn’t care, some were touched, and others were moved by the experience. The same students will wait another year before this phenomenon will, once again, impact their lives. Like garbage, the knowledge and emotional experiences collected today, will be bagged, placed in the street, and taken away tomorrow. The day seemed just as mediated as Christmas; when one questions the value of such a day, it is so distressing that I find myself laughing at it. We come away from the day as if we have been suddenly enlightened. In reality we are just pretending to be aware. If our education system was only hosted one day a year to learn, would anyone become educated? If the construction companies only worked one day a year, would anything ever be built? The issues of race and civil rights transcend MLK day, but the experience has become a mediated laughing stock. Every “awareness day” is an attempt to do what needs to be done in order to solve our societal issues. Consequently, “awareness days”, such as MLK day, detract value from the very awareness they attempt to raise. This applies to every gender, medical, equality, and poverty “awareness day” that we have throughout the year. It is ironic. People fight to have a day dedicated to a cause, yet it becomes devalued, disgraced and molested by media once it enters existence. Valuable change is brought about by people consistently spending all their days, not just one, aware of social justice issues.

As a white male, I try to acknowledge my privilege as much as possible, but I find that I am subconsciously compelled by society to just fall into place. I mock the patterns within our society, out of frustration, because I, one man, cannot change the world. Even if we set aside the social justice issues behind race, we are still left with a heaping pile of societal trash. Yes, I am talking about the monstrosity known as the gender hierarchy. By questioning man’s spot on the hierarchical tower I am jeopardizing my own masculinity. It is a system, self perpetuating, that we have all participated in since parents, commercials, and education began communicating what was “for boys” and what was “for girls”. Between the newspaper, internet, and scholarly articles, we become aware that gender inequality has been rampant for as long as human civilization can remember. I see the people around me talk and bicker about these issues that sound so big, but they treat them so small. I mock them for treating themselves as if they are aware! It is hilarious to see people puff out chests, and turn red in the face when they pretend to be confronting societal issues. I cannot get over how ridiculous it is! In the end I am lost amongst a sea of false awareness, frustrated and outraged that even becoming aware is a mediated experience.

Oh yes, now you too are frustrated by the ridiculousness of absorbing information in order to justify false awareness. I laugh at your flustered revelation! You now ask, what can I do to break free of this? I will answer that question with a smile; I am too outraged to scream. You can’t tear down a system when you are the one supporting it. Do you not realize that all this energy becoming aware is wasted? All you do is pretend that you are not part of the problem! Issues involving social hierarchies, such as race and gender, will never crumble if people work towards an end goal solution. These issues are ever changing, developing into an incomprehensible amount of problems; it is going to take everyone bringing their awareness into their everyday lives to be able to change the world. Until then I am stuck reading, talking, and writing about how I am too frustrated to scream. So instead, I laugh at those who become falsely aware, perpetuating the problems we pretend our lives have no part in. I can talk about race, I can talk about gender, but the demographic I fit into is only benefited by society. To you my words will hold very little weight compared to the experiences of the victims of our societal hierarchy; thus, I primarily write to the people who pretend they have no part in our world. The next time you have a conversation about changing the world, righting the wrongs, or the injustice of our society, remember to bring that awareness into the remainder of your life. It is a helpless feeling, knowing that “you” cannot change the world.      

An Existential Journey: Adolescent Angst and Love

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines angst as a strong feeling of being worried or nervous: a feeling of anxiety about your life or situation. The term angst has been conceptualized to target those going through the changes of adolescence. This is the doing of the media, particularly marketing, creating a social construct for the changes, behavior, and insecurities of teenagers. Adolescence has been redefined as a time of rebellion, when it is actually the first time in people’s lives that they begin to see the world from an objective standpoint. Experience can be categorized into two forms: the subjective declares the individual lives experiencing life for what it is without denoting the meaning with categorization, while the objective declares that the world can be reduced to simple definitions (categorized by language) by the individual. Society teaches children to begin viewing life as an object, however, just as five-year-olds may ask “why,” teenagers will say “no”. The time of adolescence spawns many forms of change for any individual. Bodies, minds, and societal norms are all new to a human that has spent most of its life experiencing through the subjective point of view rather than the objective. The media, dictating society, possesses a strict sink or swim policy, therefore teenagers must learn how to swim as far away from their subjective childhood. Adolescence is the existential journey that questions how one should experience life, but the world would rather force conformity than be reminded that life cannot be experienced from an objective standpoint.

The media and society have already been hard at work on my own psyche. I have already forgotten how I experienced life as a child; in its place learning how to swim amongst others in the world of objects. One could say that my island childhood isolated me from the horrors of middle school identity, but it was only a cut corner in my media sponsored education. Similar to other adolescence, I was exposed to the media in a variety of ways, but I was protected from the judgement of others. Commercials and television played a huge role in how I thought teenagers were suppose to fit into society. Music fueled the emotional turbulence created by puberty and a shift from the subjective to objective life. Worse still was school, promising me a future within society if I learned how to swim fast enough rather than sink in the wake of others. Perhaps the worst was how the opposite sex made its first appearance in my life. When possible, I was incredibly social, learning quickly how to develop a public persona to gain the appreciation of others. I was able to get along with girls and boys alike, but I felt that I was able to connect emotionally more with girls. This was something that I was often criticized for, the taunting voice of society whispering how adolescence should be. My friendship with the opposite sex soon took a turn for the objective; it was suggested to me that the girls, that I considered my friends, liked me. As a thirteen-year-old seventh-grader, the perspective of my relationships shifted and I became absorbed by what society expected of “young love”.

The latter revelation lead to a middle school relationship that had convinced myself that I had found and experienced love. Months later, to my dismay, my heart was broken and my love betrayed. In retrospect it was the messenger of society, media, that had guided me through this objective experience. I was taught by the world that love was an object that everyone strives for. I had to have this object again because what was anyone without it? Again it took form of the opposite sex; I fell head over heels, thinking I had found it for good. As any logical person could guess, my second experience of love was short lasting. Society, using its medium, had distracted my existential journey of adolescence with its objectifying version of love. Our confusing experience of the changes we go through as teenagers is tainted by how the media portrays how we should look at the world. Experiences that are subjective at a young age change into objects that we attempt to reproduce to maximise the pleasure inside the societal box.

The purpose of an objectifiable experience is to maximise pleasure and minimise suffering. To society we can only be successful by building a box around our lives so that we can control or avoid the suffering that life may bring us. It is troubling to most minds that a childhood existence of subjective experiences should be conformed to an objective one. Also confronted by the biological changes of adolescence, teenagers are overwhelmed with the requirements society projects upon them; they are prone to acting out, refuting the normal status they are demanded to take by the media. Why does society use the media to do this? Society is the safe box that minimizes suffering and maximises pleasure. It is an objectifiable experience trying to protect itself from life. The issue it has is keeping life under control; in this case life is in the form of children. Kids are unpredictable and spontaneous leaving pleasure and catastrophe in their wake. The media manifests itself early in a child’s life as a respectable source of entertainment. As early as it can the media starts to convert a child’s life into an objectifiable experience through expectations of how to live one’s life. Thus, society successfully keeps life under control because if adolescents push back they will sink, never able to become successful in the eyes of society. However, is living an objective life such a threat to our human experience? Once tucked under the wing of society, hidden in its box, we are safe from suffering. One may choose to live their life this way as Ivan Ilyich did in Leo Tolstoy’s Death of Ivan Ilyich, but they will realize that life is just as inevitable as death. When we die, as we all must, we will realize that without embracing life’s suffering coupled with life’s pleasures we will never have experienced life.