To be perfectly honest, I found last week's conference rather dry and uninteresting. Listening to the panelists, I realized I have no interest in diplomacy and international politics/economics/business, like I once thought I did. This epiphany made me think back to when I first decided to attend American University, and I was planning on majoring in the School of International Service.
That got me thinking. Why the word "service"?
One of Webster's Dictionary's definitions for the term is "the duty or work of public servants", so it makes sense that out future diplomats and businessman and policymakers would study in a school of "service". Technically though, a student majoring in Law and Society might end up being a prosecutor, but his school is not called the "School of Public Service". No, the word "service" in SIS has a much deeper meaning.
Another one of Webster's definitions is "the act of a helpful activity". The idea that the United States needs to "help" other nations is becoming outdated, since many countries are catching up to us, power-wise. When I think of "community service", I think of cleaning and fixing up dirty areas, teaching uneducated children, giving to those who need it. The person/group doing the service tends to be better off than the person/group receiving it. If we use this definition, then negotiations and business deals and such should not be considered "service", but "relations" or something of a similar sort. If we reinforce this idea that the U.S. is all-powerful and needs to fix the world's problems, this might shift students' perceptions on the world they will eventually be controlling and changing.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it. I just think it's interesting to think about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a very interesting thought. I am a student in SIS, but I never really thought about the significance of the word "service" in the title. Why is is not called School of International Affairs or Relations or Studies? Any of these titles would seem to be a more obvious choice, so the creators of SIS must have had a certain direction for their school in mind when they named it. I'm sure the intentions were noble: training a new generation of students to serve the people of the world and help solve global issues. But I agree with you that the word "service" can have a different meaning. If we are assume that our work in international relations is a "service" to the world are we assuming that our aid is always need and welcomed with open arms? There are many examples where the U.S. tried to help with global issues, but just ended up causing more problems. For instance, some might consider our War in Iraq to be a service to the people of Iraq because we are supposedly working to give them democracy. But is it really a service if many of the people are opposed to this aid? We must remember to not think of service as something that makes Americans superior to others, but as a way that we can work alongside others to make the world a better place.
ReplyDeleteI agree with AllenaM that Thomas you do rise an interesting point about the term "service". Also, to me service is as you said, community service helping others but at the same time isn't that what the United States is attempting to do. To be more abstract, would service to them as a nation signify as community service to you or I? I mean think about it, if the US was to help in Africa, fund to that particular government and to offer poor children an education, that is the same as when we attended our FSE programs at the beginning of the semester (painting the homeless shelter walls, helping children learn english, etc). The point of this is, that the term could be used, if what was mentioned earlier was what the United States was doing. Meaning, instead of putting their hands in Iraq, as AllenaM mentioned where Iraqi's don't want their help , they should send their help where needed. Where the nation calls for international help not a nation that America thinks needs help.
ReplyDeleteAll in all, at this moment in time, I think the school should be changed to something along the lines of Relations or Studies; and not until the United States could do something that the people consider a service (like community service internationally) then could the school be named what it is now: School of International Service.
I agree with AllenaM. Their intentions were probably noble when they named it the School of International Service, and the name does sort of fit. I enjoy studying international affairs and - for lack of a better phrase- learning about "issues". But sometimes I feel like SIS should really be SIED- school of international earnest discussion. Sometimes it seems sort of pretentious to sit in school just talking about other people's problems.
ReplyDelete