Thought and Disruption

The Russian psychologist Lev S. Vygotski notes in his landmark study Thought and Language, that a primary word “is not a straightforward ‘symbol of concept’ but rather an image, a picture, and a mental sketch of a concept;” for instance, the Russian word for tailor, his own example, stems from an older word for a piece of cloth, while the French and German words for tailor mean ‘one who cuts’. Vygotski also notes that such a predetermined meaning of a given word unites together when a child learns such a word without knowledge of the historic meaning. The diffused complexity of the word will only gain acceptance through combining the image with a collection of other resembling and contrasting images; for example, on television, the historic feats of Sesame Street had a continual series of clips, where four images were shown in four boxes, and the narrator stated one of these images was not like the others. Three images were of police officers and the fourth was of a firefighter. The collective of images helped the child learn the difference between the word firefighter and police officer. 

Thought development is determined via language.  This means that it is possible then to change how people think. Changing language and symbolic understanding can begin to make changes in thought. Ngugi wa Thiongo believes that this is also true in Postcolonial Theory. In his Detained, the author points out that “I am only a stammerer who tries to find articulate speech in scribbled words.” As well, the Tunisian, Albert Memmi in his 1957 reflections in The Colonizer and The Colonized on the painful and constant ‘ambiguity’ that comes with broken tongues, while the “intellectual lives in cultural anguish, the illiterate person is simply walled into his language and re-chews scraps of oral culture” (Memmi).  

The imbalances of inequality from hierarchy and hegemonic control prefer to keep those who are unaware of their strengths bogged down in un-verbal ignorance. In Kenya, when Ngugi wa Thiongo wrote novels, the government was slightly worried about his pen. But when he started to produce plays, the government was threatened. The format of a dramatic performance gave the masses the words and the visual collection to activate thought. As long as the masses cannot create thought, they will not activate power. Beyond the government of Kenya, the globalized international community has to face the growing control of corporations, especially the US corporations. As long as the majority of speech is within the limits of a computer, a brand name, a cell phone, a video game, or manufactured media and political language, people can be controlled within a limited parameter. Even with the US Amendment honoring Freedom of Speech, if one does not know the words to ‘speak truth to power’ he or she cannot articulate change. Individuals can say what they want to unless it involves speaking against the chosen system of control. It is easy to confuse ‘capitalism’ and ‘democracy’ if the words do not differentiate the two.

While Steve Biko articulated words of change to his fellow South Africans against apartheid and Assia Djebar articulated words during the French controlled Algeria, the image of privilege over others less fortunate were dictated through visual separation of white over black, French over Muslim. When the words of ‘colonialism’, ‘racism’, ‘inequality’, and ‘oppression’ create meaning because the thought comes from a language imposed through the actions, one can see how often power structures fear education.  

In 1932, the American preacher, Reinhold Niebuhr, in his book Moral Man and Immoral Society reflects on the notion of ‘ethical attitudes of a privileged class’. He brings up the clear dividing line that James Madison formatted during the early days of US independence. Declaring the ‘protection of different and unequal faculties,’ Madison made clear that inequality would perpetuate throughout US history (Niebuhr). Perhaps ‘apartheid’ South Africa has ended, and perhaps French controlled Algeria ceased for Biko and Djebar. However, the negative of oppressive acts does continue. The US military is still unjustly in Afghanistan and contracted out globally. Corporate power still finds ways to discredit critical thought.

Corporate power has a general objective and purpose. Herbert Marcuse knew this quite well. In his essay, Aggressiveness in Advanced Industrial Society, he states that the corporate purpose is “to reconcile the individual with the mode of existence which his society imposes on him. … It is necessary to achieve a libidinal cathexis of the merchandise the individual has to buy or sell, the services he has to use to perform, the fun he has to enjoy, the status symbol he has to carry in order … to exist in the society dependant on uninterrupted production and consumption” (Marcuse). The language provided in the context of images creates a thought structure, alluding back to Vygotski, where consumption is now the only language most individuals have grown to accept.

This fantasia of thought policing can easily be overlooked because the language does not speak with clear visuals. However, continually in the past year, vivid visuals of corporate lack of accountability have made it into the online media, and at times into the mainstream media; for example, the slimy pink substance in McDonald’s hamburgers and public school meats, the dissolved image of mice that vanish from Pepsi soda, the arsenic in apple juice and chicken, the recall of Pfizer birth control pills, crushed up bugs used to make pink smoothies at Starbucks, the environmental hazards now apparent to marine life in the Gulf of Mexico due to BP’s oil spill, and the list is growing.  There is a group of elite sitting above on a privileged pedestal. The 1% seem indifferent and careless to the struggles of the growing disparity in the economy. There are large corporations who continually benefit, rarely paying taxes, who seem to raise prices yet care not about the newly homeless.

All societies of the past perpetrated and perpetuated social injustice without meeting significant resistance from those who were victimized by the social system (Niebuhr). The visual of the word ‘Occupy’ is evolving into new categories beyond Wall Street. But the new language must become more than just childish stuttering.  There are words for ‘speaking up,’ can there be a visual? 

Teaching Inclusively

In a recent correspondence with a German Professor that I met at the Left Forum in March 2012, she presented me with an inquiry about the intellectual challenge of finding ways to get my students to critically go beyond basic concepts. The younger generations have been exposed to a far more manufactured understanding of history and reality under the tools of corporate technology: media, internet, film, and one can even bring in standardized tests failing to create critical thought but how to study to merely pass.

Getting my students to pull away from iphones, cellphones, computers, and headphones is an utter task. Working with international students, who may be in more affluent positions than their poorer counter parts from their own countries, have been exposed to the same manufactured bubble of the 'universal middle-class', which means they have as well not analyzed the role corporate development has exposed them to, this is a necessary task that may be neglected. 

In the classroom, I discuss a wide range of topics of global issues, whether they want to discuss the topics or not. Rather than being apathetic and ignorant of the topics, I at least make them aware of the issues, so that they are no longer ignorant. The next step is to go away from apathy. I don't know if it is possible in a short-term exposure of a single semester; but I have at least made my contribution to the academic scene by changing the voice of the institution regardless. 

I address a lot of Postcolonial Theory and enmesh it into my course work. Ngugi wa Thiongo, a Kenyan writer, discusses the idea of 'decolonizing the mind'; no more than in former colonies, but here in affluent western civilization, the masses need to decolonize their mind most from corporate 'manufactured consent' as Noam Chomsky calls it.

Students can only handle small doses of theory at a time, or it goes over their heads, just the same with most average individuals, particularly in the US. I think that in certain European countries, there is still a level of critical thinking, (from my overseas experience). But the US system nurtures 'infantiled adults'. The US system prefers childish adults who can be consumers for life, than mature adults who can solve real problems. Some of the key intellectuals that influence me at this time are Ngugi wa Thiongo, Edouard Glissant, Julia Kristeva, and Gilles Delueze. But the list is endless. Some of which appear significantly in my writing. 

In my discussion with the German Professor, I could see the similarities she mentioned in my own classes recently. In particular, my classes with middle-class economic level students at my one school are far more 'unmovable' at times. Many of these students care little about most things political or social. How to get them to talk about real issues beyond headphones, cellphones and entertainment is really tough. Visual aids, like documentaries work best. But there still remains a passivity.

More important, however, in my low-income multi-national classes with students trying to get beyond the poverty level, I feel like I am making the most impact. I have been bringing in essays written from all walks of civil rights and human rights the past two weeks. Some of the essays ranged from Martin Luther King on 'tolerance of oppression is immoral', Ngugi wa Thiongo on 'culture', Barbara Einheirch on 'maintaining the crime supply and the US prison system', and just the other day about 'Nepal acknowledging legally a third gender.' The class has been focusing on the Argumentative Essay, so by bringing in critical arguments, the students can see varying forms of presenting arguments.

I admit that my topics may appear risky and unconventional for some, yet because the syllabus required students to engage in the writing of an 'argumentative essay', I created arguments in class (yet I always respect all students right to stand by their argument and belief).  This session wasn’t to prove any one wrong or right, but to allow students to form an argument and support their position with facts, sources, and reflective analysis.

Some key moments in the class were when my class openly discussed the recent Trayvon Martin shooting in Florida. My African-American students were frustrated with racial profiling in the US. One of the male students mentioned that this could have been him. Later in class, I began discussing the 9/11 2001 attacks and how in the US since then, Muslim Americans have been racially profiled. One of the African-Americans, who earlier mentioned his anger at profiling, did not realize his own bias and mentioned how he still feared Muslims. Then my five Muslim students in class were taken aback and argued their frustration with his response. 

I began to slowly awaken some of the students bias, 'information is power'. I made my students aware that some of the most famous American athletes during the 1960's converted to Muslim teachings due to Malcolm X and as a protest to the Vietnam War. Some of the infamous athletes noted were Muhammad Ali, the boxer, and Kareem Abdul Jabar, the basketball player. This got the students curious to know more.

The following class we discussed the idea of 'culture'. Somewhere in the middle of the class time, one of my older students mentioned how 'women no longer want to stay at home and cook.' He had no clue how old fashion and outdated his response was, because my female students made voice and stood up. Even after class, my students were still discussing the arguments in the hallways. This is when I feel that I may have opened student minds and gone past the standard class time. When students continue to think about the topic after the class ends, then I feel I have started a lit fuse to ignite challenging ideas and social standards.

My last class may have been over the top. Since the previous class had ended on the gender note, between culturally imposed gender roles reflected by different generations; I attempted to discuss the idea of a third gender. The open argument and discussions were excited. Even for most Americans, the idea of societies having 'legally accepting Third Genders' as in Nepal and Thailand, challenges imagination. However, historically transgender, intersex, hermaphrodites, and eunuchs have been around societies since the start of human existence. Indigenous and tribal communities have had different roles for mixed-gendered individuals. Recently the United Nations' Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon made a great speech in March available on-line about protecting the rights of homosexuals and those who are transgender. The class discussion most likely did not change the most 'conditioned by normalization' terms, but now those students are at least aware and not oblivious. 

After class, one of my Muslim students told me she did not believe in such ideas, but when I discussed briefly with her about the historic role of Eunuchs in Islam, she did not know the history. Now she is aware, and she can search on the internet and find countless resources referencing the topic. If you give eager students who have an opinion, just a little bit of information, some of them seek outside of the class more data.  One may not have taught the student more than he or she had before class, nor have impacted them to think critically. But one can at least try to share information to create the possibility to think more inclusively.