After reading the “Impossible” chapters I was defiantly moved. I think that the messages being relayed through these chapters is exactly what everyone in the world needs to hear right now. I think that a lot of people are feeling hopeless and that their small actions will not do anything to affect change, but this reassures that they are wrong. With COVID-19 I think that it is so important for everyone to realize that even the smallest actions will have a large impact in someone else’s life. For example, when the author was telling the story of how her neighbor drove her home once and how impactful that was; staying home and donating (if you can) to food pantries around your area can have such a positive impact in someone’s life. I think that people are intimidated by what is going on right now, especially because nobody can really tell what is to come next and how long we will be on stay at home orders, but I think that the author is right in saying that it will not change all at once. If everyone bands together then the collective kind actions of everyone will lead to the momentous change, we are all hoping for.

Honestly before reading this I was so discouraged due to COVID-19 but one quote really stuck out to me, “I suspect we all have our three- in- the- morning moments, when all of life seems like a no- exit film noir, where any effort is pointless, where any hope seems to be born only to be dashed, like a fallen nestling on a summer sidewalk” (54). The author describes that when she gets in mindsets like she described she thinks of all of the small good things in her life to get through it. I think that this is a great mindset to have during this pandemic, because we should focus on what good things we have in our lives and be grateful that we have them. I think that this is a perspective that so many people need to realize, because we are all in this together and we will get through it as long as we work together.

I watched the recorded Jepson Forum Talk from February of this year by Virginia Eubanks, entitled “Algorithms, Austerity, and Inequality”. Virginia Eubanks is political science professor at University of Albany SUNY and author, notably of “Automating Inequality” which was the focus of her talk. Eubanks starts the talk describing what a poorhouse is, which was an actual building that people in the 1800’s had to go to, to get any public aid. Once you arrived at a poorhouse you had to surrender your rights to vote, own property, marry, and if you had children you were separated from them, so checking into a poorhouse was a major choice. She discusses how the technology and big data tools that our nation has implemented in choosing who gets recourses and who does not has created a “digital poorhouse” which is an invisible institution that is comprised of digital decision-making algorithms. Eubanks states that the high-tech tools that are used to measure effectiveness, and eligibility for social welfare programs are used to “recreate and rationalize austerity, proport to address bias in decision making (but really just hide it) and create empathy overrides for difficult decisions”. She states that one of the main reasons poorhouses were created in the 1800’s and why there are such problems with social welfare programs today is the idea of austerity; which is the idea that there is not enough for everyone and that we have to make difficult decisions about who should be able to make their basic human needs and who shouldn’t.

Eubanks shares the stories of multiple families and individuals that have been negatively impacted by the automation of the eligibility for social welfare programs, and the outsourcing of the case workers that used to be able to have more empathy for the families. The automation of the system has not only prevented well deserving people from getting the aid that they need, but also wasted millions of dollars creating the online programs, money that could have gone to families in need. Additionally, she discusses the justification that the technology gets rid of bias is making it worse for minorities. The system she discusses records all of the state aid that families need, and if they get reported for doing something wrong it is from a bystander, who can racially profile, not the machine. Also, by leaving these hard decisions to computers that could change people’s lives is a way for the people running the programs not to deal with the bad feelings they get from denying people basic aid. Finally, Eubanks ends the talk with discussing what we can do to end this negative feedback loop that the digitalized programs have created. She says that the US needs to tell a vastly different story of poverty in the country than they do now. Today there are millions of Americans that deal with poverty, although the majority temporary, it is not due to the classic lazy person taking advantage of the government picture that we all have learned about. The fact that so many people deal with this the main reason why this system needs to be fixed. Additionally, everyone thinks that technology is neutral, but it is neutral it will support the current status quo. When building technology for social welfare programs it needs to be built justly on purpose. Overall, the problems of this system have to do with the leadership involved. The people leading all of these programs are middle to upper class who have no idea what the poor people really need. This talk really opened my eyes to see how large this problem is in our country and how desperately it needs to be fixed.

I watched an interview on the show Conversations with Bill Kristol entitled “Our Civic Life in Decline” with Robert Putnam. Robert Putnam is a professor of public policy at the Harvard School of Government, a distinguished author, scholar, and political aid and commentator, among other things. This interview focused on the work that Putnam has been focusing on in the last few years, the decline of communities and the growing opportunity gap. Over the last fifty years our nation has gained getter technology, better acceptance of minorities (for the most part), higher life expectancies, etc. yet our sense of community has gone extremely down. Putnam discusses the fact that our nation was built on high social capital and high social trust, but currently our nation is lacking in those areas. The reason for this according to Putnam is the growing opportunity gap and the growing segregation of American society as a result. The current trends occurring in the US are that the kids from upper class families continue do better and better, while kids coming from working class families are doing worse and worse. Putnam points out that this has a lot to do with the differences in the times that America has faced. He Is referring to the 50’s when he grew up when the phrase “our kids” meant the kids of the town, when today that same phrase means only your biological children. People have stopped caring about the well-being of the kids in the areas they live in because they want their kids to have the best opportunities, which has led to this nation feeling like less of a community.

Today there are so many barriers that prevent kids from working class or lower income families from succeeding and or being on the same level as kids from college educated or upper-class families. One example that I did not even realize that was contributing to this problem was the fact that the majority, if not all, sports and extracurricular activities are “pay to play”. This means that there are so many fees and costs of equipment that often lower income families could not afford to let their kids participate. These extracurriculars are so important because they teach kids soft skills that will be useful in the workplace, as well as giving kids positive role models that are not their parents. The skills that the kids from upper class families receive from these activities put lower income kids at a disadvantage that is not realized in this country. Although test scores and schools do play a large role in the opportunity gap, there are people actively trying to solve those problems, but one of the biggest problems is that kids are not being given to learn teamwork and comradery. Putnam made a great point in that the opportunity gap was just as big in 1910, but the people of rural Kansas came up with public high school, which closed the gap and instantly helped the economy grow. Putnam urged the audience that there is a way to change the opportunity gap that we face today and that all it would take is people banding together and coming up with a solution like introducing public high school to the nation.

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZHZc-kcyQ

I was assigned to watch both the Democrat and Republican campaign ads for 1964, surrounding the election between then current president, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Barry Goldwater. This was an interesting election because in 1963 Johnson went from being JFK’s Vise President to the President after JFK’s assassination.  I was fascinated while watching these ads because they are from over fifty years ago and the issues both candidates focused on are so different from what I am used to seeing in current political ads. I thought that it was so interesting how both Johnson and Goldwater has so many “attack ads” but not in the way that I was used to. The threat of nuclear war and communism was consuming people’s minds as the Cold War was occurring, and both candidates used fear of both to prove why they are the better choice for the US. Also, another huge topic that was focused on in 1964 that is still focused on today are the social welfare programs. Johnson was trying to increase Social Security and introduce Medicare to the nation and used quotes from Goldwater to show how he was not for these programs that would benefit all. I think that Johnson did a much better job in his ad campaigns because he used real quotes from Goldwater and his supporters liking him with the KKK, as well as using testimony from Republicans, both government officials as well as regular people, to show why Goldwater was not the right choice.

I was not expecting the amount of fear mongering these ads would have in them, but it does make sense due to the state of the world at that time. I thought that Johnson’s campaign slogan, “Vote for President Johnson on November 3^rd, the stakes are too high to stay home”, was very fitting for the times because with everyone so afraid already of the threat that the Cold War posed to them, Johnson was showing in all of his ads that he was handling it and that everyone would be safe. My favorite ad from 1964 was for Johnson, and it was entitled “Ice Cream”. This ad consists of a video of a little girl eating ice cream while a voice over plays discussing atomic bombs and what their effects can do to children, and how they can make people die. The ad goes on to say that this was thankfully stopped when the government got together to sign the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty to make the radio activeness “go away”, but that there is a man who wants to bring it back, aka Goldwater, and finally ends with Johnson’s campaign slogan. . I liked this ad so much because it really tugs at your heart strings, seeing this sweet little girl enjoying her ice cream while the threat of nuclear testing in the US is threatened if you do not vote for LBJ. I find this ad to be extremely efficient, because it reminds the viewer that the stakes ARE too high, and that innocent people would be at risk if they did not go out and vote for him.

I do not watch much TV, but I am exposed to ads constantly, especially in my email. Admittedly, I did sign up for some of these emails, or bought things from websites that now send me emails. I find that their subjects and their advertising emails are my favorites because I find that they really drew me in. This is usually always the case, but I have found that ever since COVID-19 has caused me to social distance this has been the case so much more. I think that this not only has to do with the fact that I am very bored, but also the fact that the brands are using this opportunity to sell their lounge wear, cute but comfy clothes to work from home in, and accessories for staying at home. The ad that I am using for this blog post is an email that I received from Free People last week that was entitled “WFH- ready, but still comfy”. This email instantly drew me in because I thought that I needed things that were comfy yet were not sweatpants and sweatshirts. Obviously, I do not need these clothes, but I definitely did online shop.

This is exactly what our readings discussed, especially in regard to the “four tricks of advertising” discussed in Teays’s article (481). In this ad step 1 shame is that I have supposedly nothing to wear that is comfortable yet also appropriate for work. Steps 2 and 3 optimism and solution are that the problem can be solved by all of the clothing items that they are showing in this particular email, various cute tops that seem to be comfortable, by the body language of the models. Step 4 in this email is the fact that they use language like “more shirts for your video calls under $50” to show that it is worth the money to purchase these tops. I think that it is so interesting how so many clothing brands like Free People are taking the pandemic and using it as a marketing ploy to sell people more clothes even though nobody is interacting with one another in person. I think that this shows a lot of creativity on their part, and at the same time really enticing people like me to actually buy these clothes from these emails.

On Friday February 21^st, before COVID- 19, my justice class took a field trip to the Virginia Museum of History and Culture to see the exhibit “The Determined: The 400- Year Struggle for Black Equality” to focus on the inequalities that the African Americans in Richmond faced, as well as the implications regarding schools. This was an excellent exhibit because it walked through the very first arrival of slaves from Africa to the United States and how the process of civil rights got us to present day. The exhibit was very interesting because it really showcased the laws and legislation that the United States has had throughout time regarding African Americans and how far they have come. I thought that it was very well done because along with every milestone that indicated each part of the exhibit, there were multiple perspectives of people from Virginia about how their experience with slavery or the Jim Crow Laws or recent discrimination. I thought that it was especially interesting how in the very beginning they highlighted a story of a nameless woman’s journey from Africa to the US and her experience being sold into slavery. I think that these personal touches throughout really made much more of a lasting impact of the overall experience.

While I already knew the basic history of slavery and the civil rights movement in the United States, I did not realize how long it took, and is still currently taking, Virginia to desegregate its schools. Virginia is one of the states that took the longest to desegregate schools and had to jump through many hoops to do so. I think that it is crazy that Prince Edward County closed all public schools and opened only private schools for white children to avoid having to desegregate. I also cannot fathom how the Virginia state government allowed and encouraged similar things all over the state. Although Virginia has come a long way since that time, schools in Richmond are still segregated, but not by law. The income needed to live in a good suburb and go to a good public school is dominated by white people, and the African American children are still in lesser school because they live in poorer areas. I think that this exhibit is very important to have in Richmond because it reminds us of our past and how far we have come, and it also reminds us how far we still have to go.

Dr. Bezio’s article was so interesting because it really showed the importance of the sociohistorical context and evaluating leadership. After reading the background of what Shakespeare’s England looked like in terms of politics, my eyes were completely opened up. I have not studied Shakespeare in depth, besides the few plays I read in high school, but I think that it is so intriguing how the Romans and the Greeks represent the English and the Scottish. This rivalry and the information about how the people of England thought that the Scottish people would corrupt the English. This can really be seen in the play Pericles with the way that the Union project and James connects to the looking for marriage in the play. I think that it is so interesting how what was occurring in the 1600’s with the people of England not wanting to unify relates so much to Brexit today and how the people of England want to break apart and be separate again. This really shows the long history of the traditional English identity that has never really been broken.

I think that the reading “Questioning leadership: an integrative model” by Michael Harvey relates to Dr. Bezio’s article because it discusses the importance of a group in regard to leadership. The seven questions that Harvey focuses on mostly identify with what the makeup of the group is and how the leader can best answer the questions and needs of the group. This reading emphasized the importance of communication between the leader and the group of followers because it is super important for the group to know what is going on, where they are going, etc. If there is poor communication, then the group is harder to be united and that is one of the most important things in leadership. It is very important for the group to like their leader and one of the key ways for a leader to gain the trust and likeness of their group is to be open and communicate with them.

I thought that the Zinn reading was extremely interesting. I have enjoyed learning about how history that we learn in middle school is almost never what actually occurred in my 101 class and again with this reading. I had always known to some degree that Columbus was not good to the native people and brought diseases to the new world, but I did not know the extent or the back story to his actions. I thought that it was so interesting to learn that Columbus completely over exaggerated what he had found to King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella so that they could give him a bigger fleet for his next journey. Not that his actions are justifiable at all, I this that it is fascinating that Columbus was put under so much pressure to please the king and that is why “he committed irreparable crimes against the Indians” (6). I also thought that it was not surprising how Columbus and his team were only concerned with the riches and honor that they could bring back to Spain and did not think about the long-term consequences at all.

This reading made me think about a documentary I recently had to watch for my justice class called “Harvest of Empire”. This documentary was about how the US interfered with South American countries only because it would help our economy or bring money into businesses that we supported. The documentary highlights how the US did not care at all about what they were doing to the nation’s governments would impact the native people living there. I thought that there were a lot of connections between the documentary and the Zinn reading because they both deal with looking at people who will do just to preserve and gain power and riches. I also saw so many similarities in the way that there was complete disregard for the native people of the nations that the US and Columbus were invading. This really makes me wonder why we still celebrate Columbus Day in the US when there is so much about how he was actually an awful person. Also, this makes me think about how every American grows up with a very idealistic vision of US history but in reality it is mainly fake to make the US look much better than it actually is.

I thought that the piece by Goethals and Allison, “Mystery and Meaning: Ambiguity and the Perception of Leaders, Heroes and Villains” was so interesting. I had not known how big of a part mystery and the unknown play in our everyday lives and our decision making. I found it fascinating all of the different motivations that humans have for the desired conclusions about mystery. When I read that waitresses and waiters often remember the orders that did not get made or did not get paid the most because it did not have the usual ending and therefore caused tension in their minds because they did not get closure. I can relate to this because in high school I worked as a hostess at a restaurant in my town and I can remember all of the times when huge parties of people would come in without a reservation, or when reservations never showed up. Also, I had talked a lot about the image of a leader and how people are more likely to choose a leader based off of looks and how their voice sounded in my 101 class, and I thought that it was so interesting that Harding was an awful president but he got elected openly because his looks “fit the bill”. One thing that I was surprised to learn concerning looks of a leader, was how similarly people choose mates in such a similar possess as they choose leaders, “we want them to be attractive and attracted to us, just as we want leaders to be great and  to signal that we have value to them” (24). I found this whole article to be so interesting because it pointed out things that I can recognize myself doing in regard to mystery and the unknown that I had never realized before.

I have learned about the Stanford prison experiment in a few of my other classes at Richmond and each time it is brought up, it never gets easier to read about. I think that the way that this experiment was conducted was not ethical at all and caused much more harm to the participants than getting any results. First, one of the biggest problems that I have with this experiment is the fact that the people chosen to be guards were not trained at all, and the people chosen to be prisoners were innocent people. I think that by making a simulation that produced actual psychological impacts on the people in it was not the way to go about seeing what prison life was like. I think that creating the fake prison with the real power dynamic was much more harmful than helpful. I thought that the way that the prisoners were treated and the power that the guards got in their heads were similar to what Goethals and Alison were talking about in that when there is mystery you use looks and stereotypes to judge people. If a prisoner looked a specific way, they were treated much worse, only because of how humans deal with the unknown. I thought that it was very interesting to look at this experiment when thinking about why people are judged based off of how they look and what attributes and characteristics that we assign to people when we assume things about their background and history.

After reading “Methods of Gathering Scientific Evidence” by Stern and Kalof I could not help but think of the current situation that the world is in, and what method of gathering evidence would be best. I think that the coronavirus is so unpredictable and changing day by day because nobody really knows much about the virus itself, in what conditions it can/ cannot survive in, and nobody knows how to cure it. This is causing general panic which is not adding to this already stressful situation. I think that it is clear that the naturalistic observation method would not necessarily work in this situation because nobody was observing at the exact moment when the coronavirus started, but it will be interesting to hear the actual accounts of what it is like to have it and to study it. It is very strange to think about how many retrospective case studies there will be on this situation after this pandemic is over.  I also think that there are many different variations of the sample studies going on as the world and nation try to see what the mortality rates are and how many people actually have the virus. I think that this reading was very interesting especially because it was so easy to relate to what we are all experiencing currently.

I also think that the situation that the world is in with the coronavirus can be applied to the second reading by Von Ruden and vanVugt especially in regard to cultural lags. There are so many cultural lags that we experience in society that we have to deal with, and I think that they are ever more apparent now that we are seeing that we are not equipped for a virus like COVID-19. I think that this article’s discussion of leadership also brings to light the issues that we may have with who is leading the world currently and what this pandemic will do to the upcoming election. I think that it will be very interesting to see what people will look for in a leader in the 2020 election. I find that it is very interesting how this pandemic is becoming political in a sense, Democrats saying that Trump did not do enough in the beginning, and Trump saying that the “liberal” media is blowing the coronavirus out of proportions. I think that this such an unprecedented event that will have a definite impact on the way that our nation and the world is run in the future.