The United States coincidentally happens to be my dream place of citizenship. If this is bombshell news – you are alien to me! The road to naturalization is a rather long and obstacle-ridden one but with sheer determination and work, I don’t think anything can really be that far from being realized. In today’s installment, I want to briefly (maybe) state my reasons behind my favorism of this country in particular – and the cultural and social factors that shape my infatuation with this so-called land of the free and brave citizen.
a low-context culture coupled with youthful, individualistic attitudes readily appeals to the wanderer with no cultural deadweight
First and probably the single most important factor would be the prevalence of an overall low-context culture. The United States is a young country, culturally. Unlike its southern neighbor, Mexico or Europe – the US hadn’t matured into a unique cultural identity just yet and is still in the infancy of its development. Low-context cultures are distinctly observed in urban and ethnically diverse regions of the world – where the traditional ideological pragmatism of the everyday folk cannot be observed. So why do I favor a low-context culture? My reasons are two-fold. One, these cultures are often very explicit in stating and adhering to protocol. Per Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, America likes to avoid uncertainty through a strict adherence to protocol. Deadlines are rigid and there’s little effort reserved toward trying to accommodate people who may not be able to adhere as easily. This translates to an introvert’s paradise for asocial people like me tend to have a rather tough time participating in cultural pragmatism – and without pragmatism, nobody is inherently required to know or do anything to function in society, making this reason number two. Continue reading →
Linda Sarsour, a famous name among the far-left and fellow of the Jihad movement had spoken in UCBerkeley about what she believes were hard topics of the day – addressing them through her own vigilante of justice. After what felt like a heartfelt call to action on white supremacy and prejudice against the Muslim community of America, she boldly incited Jihad in the name of Allah to fight the alt-right and the Trump administration. The brainwashed liberals of Berkeley played along as you’d expect of any ideology with basis in popular opinions of the day. To those who have witnessed the insidiousness of Islam, here you will find reason for the pressing questions you might have been wanting to ask. To those who have not read or experienced Islam, you will find factual arguments based in sociology, psychology and anthropology to the many debatable notions surrounding this religion. Platforms for open debate are often ostracized from the mainstream in submission to pressure (or more often, threats) from the Muslim community.
Islam lives for conquest, facilitated by a militant theological system that exploits its own people for the superficial gain of Allah – only to reward them under their paradigm
an aggressive agenda-driven movement can never peacefully coexist in secularity, especially if that agenda comes from the ideology of Islam
One evening in Chicago, I’d probably just returned from an exhausting day out and settled in to read the news. This was back in late 2016 and the trending stories of the day were either about the elections which we know as among the most bizarre in American history or the infamous travel ban, then dubbed the Muslim ban. Shortly after the ban had been called into effect, an almost spontaneous response from the local community followed. I read a story how people had already gathered and continued gathering in huge numbers outside Terminal 5 to try and stop the ban. Seeing I had nothing interesting to do, I put on my trusty jacket and headed out and took the next Blue Line service to O’Hare for some investigative journalism. This is where I was greeted by all kinds of warming chants. They were at best superficial and rhetorical but that’s what makes protests tick let alone the fact the crowd were predominantly liberals. There were more opinions than facts being pushed. One chant stood out, it went “this is what democracy looks like” only said in a slightly cringe-y yet poetic tone. Well, if there’s one thing I could do by going back in time would be helping them see their own hypocrisy.
Is it democratic to grant freedom to a group that might potentially take away our freedom? These are moral conundrums left on the hanging. These conundrums gain in controversy with passing time from our reluctance to initially approach these issues – because they’re controversial. It challenges hard-etched moral constructs our society has grown to embrace and be a part of. Ever since the cultural movements that shook France and the rest of Europe, the Renaissance and Enlightenment have left (the vast majority of) Christians indoctrinated with the civil qualities of equality and tolerance. The West has almost become synonymous with these civil liberties we take for granted.
I read this somewhere but I’m unable to trace it back to its author,
diversity is not our strength if there is no common cause