The Cosmopolitan Blog

- It's my nationality, my philosophy… and my favorite drink!
  • Home
  • About CosmoChick
  • Poll Archives
  • Email

Obama’s win – what it really means

June 4, 2008 | 10:39 am

I was watching CNN’s videos this morning, and listening to what the world’s reaction is to Obama becoming the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party. Interestingly, in places like Lebanon, it was more important to them for a woman to have won. I think that the impact of a woman winning would have been greater around the world, because women’s struggle is a concept universally understood, which touches everyone in some way. On the other hand, the fact that a black man won a victory in the US is probably harder to understand for those who don’t follow US history as we do, and who don’t understand the African-American struggle.

Other reactions around the world: Germans are delighted, seeing Obama in a similar light as they did John F. Kennedy 50 years ago. In Japan, a group of female fans dream of meeting Obama. And in China, they seem happy with the fact that Clinton did not win, seeing her as a old-style hardliner who would perpetuate the impression Americans have of China. …and it India, they just want to see a president who will push India further up on the world map. Maybe they think the US government should outsource to India like the rest of us!

Comments
No Comments »
Categories
The 'isms' I believe in
Tags
african-american, barak, china, clinton, democracy, democrats, election, germany, hillary, japan, kennedy, lebanon, obama, politics, racism, sexism, US, women struggle, world
Comments rss Comments rss
Trackback Trackback

Is the US More Sexist or More Racist?

May 29, 2008 | 5:03 pm

In a post back in January, when there were still more than 2 candidates in each party for the US elections, i predicted that if either Hillary or Obama became the party nominee, then the Democrats would loose the general election and the next president would be a republican.

I still stand by this statement. See, I always asked the question “is the US more sexist or racist”. We think this question no longer applies, since 1/2 of america is voting for a black man and the other 1/2 for a woman and one would think the answer is that it’s pretty much equal. But that’s not true, it still very much applies: now that we know our opponent is McCain, who is more electable and likely to win against him, a woman or a black man? So again, I ask the question “is the US more sexist or more racist”?

I personally always thought America was more ready to elect a woman than a black man. After all, this is a country where there a still TWO schools that have some sort of racial segregation.

My personal viewpoint is that, by nature, the Democrats are more likely to accept a minority lead them. So they are more likely to accept a black man. But when it comes to the elections, we may also be looking at a whole bunch of republicans and undecided, who DON’T want to vote for McCain. Will they vote for Barack? I don’t think they will. And in that case, I feel that maybe Clinton should be McCain’s opponent, I think that a republican is more likely to vote for a woman than a black man.

This is absolutely 100% my opinion and understanding of this country from what i hear, what i observe, having lived there and having most of my friends and family still living there. Now, i want to hear what you think. Feel free to post a comment or two. Or answer the poll question on the right. Is the US more sexist or more racist?

Comments
No Comments »
Categories
The 'isms' I believe in
Tags
barack, bush, clinton, democracy, democrats, gender, hillary, mccain, obama, politics, race, racist, republican, sex, sexist, usa
Comments rss Comments rss
Trackback Trackback

Seeing the world through their eyes

July 6, 2007 | 2:13 am

Part of the cosmopolitanism philosophy is the acceptance that no nation, culture or political model is better than another, that there are pros and cons for each, but that they each have a reason for existence. After all, each culture, nation and regime exists because it grew from a need for this ideology. If no one agreed with it, no one would adhere to it. There aren’t enough people in this world that can be mass-coerced to adhere. So should we be looking at the tribal way of life in countries like Afghanistan and Iraq (I mention them because they’re on our daily news, so I figure everyone knows where these countries are) and feel sorry for their backward way of life? I’m not sure.

Don’t get me wrong, I think the world is a better place without Saddam Hussein. I think that the tyrant deserved to be held accountable for his crimes. Should we show social responsibility by sticking around once we remove a dictator to ensure that the country will fall back on its feet? Possibly. But the very least we owe the citizens of that country is to see the world through their eyes. How did they get to this point? What motivated them to remain / accept this regime? Are you telling me that 25K+ Iraqi citizens have been sitting there praying for the brave westerners to rescue them? Really? Convince me, I dare you!

But we’re there now. So let’s see the world through their eyes for one moment. Can we honestly claim that democracy is a better regime that the country should aspire to establish? Why? Because it allows individuals to have their own rights and create their own wealth? Sure, that sounds like a good reason, and apparently, in the West, we believe it is, that’s why most western countries have adopted it. But why would be so arrogant as to believe that it will work best all over the world? Why do we think we’re doing other countries a favor by encouraging democracy?

It’s like criticizing woman in Islamic societies for wearing the hijab. Have you tried speaking to one of them and suggesting that they should be independant and non-submissive? Good luck with that! Yes, there will be a large number of them who will allow themselves to dream for a couple of seconds, and imaging the independant life they could be living, with their own goals and careers. And then they will submissively resign themselves to the current state of things. But! But, there’s a huge number of them will defend their choice and their way of life. They respect it and want it that way… It’s the way they’ve been brought out, to take care of the house and the family, and to think of the community before they think of their individual desires… And this is less noble than a career-minded western woman because….?????

I’m struggling to understand all of this… I should probably not think of the state of the world at 2am… *sigh*

Comments
No Comments »
Categories
The 'isms' I believe in
Tags
afghanistan, canada, citizens, cosmopolitanism, culture, democracy, East, england, europe, france, ideology, independant, iraq, middle nation, north america, objectivism, opinion, peace, philosophy, planet, pragmatic pacifism, regime, states, tribal, uk, united kingdom, usa, war, West, western, world, world opinion
Comments rss Comments rss
Trackback Trackback

NEW POSTS: Get Notified

RSS RSS Feed
email  
Also: Get Notified of New Comments
RSS Comments RSS Feed

Polls

Facebook Privacy Settings...

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Categories

Archives

Tags

architecture barack blog blogging boat canada cathedral celebrity church clinton cnn cosmochick democrat democrats fun hillary malaga marbella maroc mccain montreal morocco obama opinion politics port resort seville spain sun tangers tangiers tapas tarifa The Food travel tv twitter twitter update US usa us politics vacation world yachts

My Online Presence

Digg  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  FriendFeed  Facebook  LinkedIn  MySpace  YouTube  Picasa  Flickr  BlogCatalog  Blogger  Dailymotion  Last.fm  LiveJournal  reddit  StumbleUpon  

Blogroll

  • 1. CosmoChick's PhotoBlog
  • 2. Astral Marketing
  • 3. Observer Blog
  • 4. Delect-able
  • 5. @YourSide
  • 6. Cheap Ethnic Eatz
  • 7. L'Arcane B&B

Who’s Online

rss Comments rss valid xhtml 1.1 design by jide powered by Wordpress get firefox