‘Knowledge society’ and ‘knowledge economy’ have become accepted terms that characterize our post-industrial world. The concept of knowledge society assumes that knowledge “should be dominant, just as agriculture and industry have dominated earlier societies” (Sörlin & Vessuri, 2007, p. 12). The rhetoric of knowledge economy suggests that knowledge is essentially the capital or a personal asset in the contemporary economy, just as land in agricultural societies and factories in industrial societies (Davies & Guppy, 2010c). Although these analogies seem descriptive and sensible, they are nevertheless not free of ambiguity: For one thing, we can say that agriculture and industry “dominated” earlier societies because farming and manual work were the fundamental modes of production in those societies; but how is it that knowledge has dominated today’s society? For another, land and factories were “capital” and “personal assets” in previous societies because they were the means of production that led to economic gain for people who possessed them; but can the same logic apply to knowledge and individuals who possess it? 

The problematic use of “knowledge” in the analogies between the features of our contemporary society and those of the previous ones prompts me to investigate the meaning of ‘knowledge society’ and ‘knowledge economy’. In this regard, two main questions guide my inquiry: What beliefs and values are constructed and promoted by the notion of knowledge society? What does the rhetoric of knowledge economy emphasize, and how do people conduct themselves accordingly? I ground my analyses of these questions in the sociology of education because the concepts of knowledge society and knowledge economy suggest a close tie between education, knowledge, and the economy: ‘knowledge’ is seen as the defining feature of our contemporary society and the economy; and education mediates the production and dissemination of knowledge.

In the first section of this paper, I trace the emergence of the idea of knowledge society and how the meaning of this concept has evolved since it was first proposed in the 1960s. In the second section, I examine education and employment in the new global economy by drawing on the work of Livingstone (1999), Jarvis (2001), and Harris (2004).  I conclude by pointing out the implications of the notions of knowledge society and knowledge economy for the education system.

Understanding ‘Knowledge Society’

The idea of knowledge society originated in the post-World War Ⅱ era when mass higher education began to emerge (Sèorlin & Vessuri, 2007). In the 1960s, Peter Drucker suggested that “knowledge has become the central factor of production in an advanced, developed society” (as cited in Beerkens, 2008, p. 17). He asserted, “The key to producing more work was to work smarter (instead of harder); the key to productivity was knowledge (instead of sweat)” (as cited in Beerkens, 2008, p. 17). In Drucker’s statement, knowledge was tied to the advancement of a society; and the nature of work would evolve as knowledge became a smarter and more efficient production factor substituting labour.

About a decade after Drucker’s illustration of a “smarter” way of work in an advanced society, in the early 1970s, Harvard sociologist Daniel Bell (1973) predicted shifts in the location and content of people’s work in an emerging new society (Beerkens, 2008; Davies & Guppy, 2010b). In his influential work The Coming of Post-Industrial Society, Bell (1973) argued that the most advanced countries were moving beyond industrialism and entering into a post-industrial society –– a society characterized by high rates of productivity and the workforce moving toward the nonindustrial sectors of the economy. Bell’s (1973) post-industrial society was a knowledge-driven society in which “the sources of innovation are increasingly derivative from research and development … and … the weight of the society–––measured by a larger proportion of the Gross National Product and a larger share of employment–––is increasingly in the knowledge field” (as cited in Beerkens, 2008, p. 18). In Bell’s (1973) vision of future societies, knowledge was associated with innovation. By highlighting the importance of research and development, Bell (1973) indicated that scientific knowledge would become the fundamental driver of the post-industrial society.

It is not possible to actualize an advanced society defined by science if a high proportion of the labour force is working on farms and in factories, which explains why the idea of knowledge society did not gain much prominence until the twentieth century. As Sèorlin and Vessuri (2007) put it, “In essence, the knowledge society could only be conceived of as a society where a large portion … of the population had some elementary academic education, and where quite a few also had advanced degrees” (p. 6). The role of education in the knowledge society formation is well laid out in Sèorlin and Vessuri’s (2007) statement: the very existence of the notion of knowledge society depends on the population’s participation in education.

As I have shown, knowledge started off in the 1960s and 1970s being seen as primarily a productivity factor of future societies. While still considered as the economic driver, knowledge is now “intellectual capital” (Stewart, 1997, p. 61) and a “primary personal asset” (Davies & Guppy, 2010c, p. 117). As knowledge has shifted from society’s means to achieve economic prosperity to individuals’ intellectual capital, it has been reconceptualized from a common public good to a private good (Jarvis, 2007) –– and consequently, greater emphasis has been placed on individuals’ academic attainments. Knowledge is now something that members of a ‘knowledge society’ must seek and possess to be able to participate in the labour market. In the following section, I will discuss to a fuller extent the widespread demand for individuals to engage in education.

Questioning the ‘Knowledge Economy’

While recognizing that ‘knowledge society’ is already a reality, Livingstone contends that “the ‘knowledge economy’ … is still illusory” (1999, p. 171). He suggests that the increasing adult participation in formal education, continuing education, and informal education shows that lifelong learning and the knowledge society are “alive and well”; however, there is massive underemployment of workers’ knowledge and learning capacity in the workplace. He documents the underemployment in the U.S. and Canada and finds that there is a wide gap in educational attainments between those from lower class and from the higher class; there is a structural unemployment gap between the number of job seekers and the actual number of jobs available; there is a notable credential attainment––credential requirement gap; there is also a performance gap between workers’ high educational attainments and the actual knowledge needed to perform their jobs; and ‘subjective underemployment’ is also identified when workers consider themselves overqualified for their jobs. These education––job gaps reveal the immense wastage of knowledge and human resources in the ‘knowledge economy’, and hence the irony of conceptualizing ‘knowledge’ in contemporary society as analogous to land and factories in previous societies – it is difficult to imagine land in agricultural societies and factories in industrial societies being wasted as knowledge is in today’s economy!

The reality is that a great number of workers are overqualified for their jobs, yet the most common response to underemployment is to seek further education as though “somehow they must continue to get more and still more education, training or knowledge in order to achieve any economic security” (Livingstone, 1999, p. 181)! Instead of contesting the structural malfunctions, individuals have come to assume responsibilities for their own learning and employment opportunities. It is exactly as Jarvis explained – the notion of lifelong learning is built on the idea that anyone can get education at any stage of their lives, and “the possibility of social advancement is held out to them” (2001, p. 197). In a neoliberal society where individualism and meritocracy are emphasized, the pervasive assumption is that anyone can transform their lives by pursuing education. This notion is confronted by Harris’ (2004) argument that the globalized and de-industrialized economy needs different types of workers to fill positions at opposite ends of the labour market, so not everyone is ‘meant to’ succeed in the new economy even if they have ‘certified knowledge’. Livingstone points out that “recommendations that stress a growing need for lifelong learning” among an overwhelmingly underemployed workforce “miss the point” (1999, p. 182); rather, the emphasis should be placed on restructuring the workplace and utilizing the knowledge and skills that the workers already have.

Concluding Remarks

The notion of knowledge society places considerable emphasis on the need to develop a highly educated workforce to compete in the global economy. Consequently, education is seen as crucial to national success; and lifelong learning is promoted in most advanced capitalist societies (Livingstone, 1999). However, “learning throughout the whole life does not appear to be as important as learning throughout the work life” (Jarvis, 2001, p. 201) in the discourse of capitalism. The problem of the discourse is that learning––the very idea of human emancipation and human fulfillment––is reduced to a survival tactic; education, is no more than a process that manufactures the type of workers that the capitalist workplaces demand; and most importantly, the ‘person’ is omitted from the discourse when economic competitiveness and national success are emphasized –– and individuals’ learning is undertaken for that end. Marx envisioned an education system that would “truly nurture the development of the whole person” (Davies & Guppy, 2010a, p. 27). Fostering the development of the whole person in today’s insecure economy and increasingly stratified society means engaging learners in critical thinking about social reality, and helping them develop critical consciousness of their social positions (Freire, 2000) and gain the power needed to challenge inequality and injustice.

Through providing a brief historical background, I have illustrated some of the positive connotations attached to the concept of knowledge society, and how the ideas and values that come with this concept contribute to the growing participation in education. It is not knowledge itself, but people’s seeking of knowledge that is dominant in the knowledge society. In examining education and employment in the contemporary economy, I have shown that there is tremendous wastage of knowledge and human capital in the so-called knowledge economy. Rather than emphasizing lifelong learning, reorganization of the workplace is needed to enable the workers to apply the knowledge and skills they already possess. Finally, I have suggested that placing learning for work before learning for life degrades education and learning from human emancipation to a survival tactic; and that a humanistic approach should be adopted in the education system to foster the development of the whole person. I end with bell hooks’ (1994) hopeful voice:

The academy is not paradise. But learning is a place where paradise can be created. The classroom with all its limitations remains a location of possibility. In that field of possibility we have the opportunity to labour for freedom, to demand of ourselves and our comrades, an openness of mind and heart that allows us to face reality even as we collectively imagine ways to move beyond boundaries, to transgress. This is education as the practice of freedom (p. 207). 

References

Beerkens, E. (2008). University policies for the knowledge society: Global standardization, local reinvention. Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, 7, 15-36.

Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York: Basic Books.

Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (2010a). Classical sociological approaches to schooling. In S. Davies & N. Guppy (Eds.). The schooled society: An introduction to the sociology of education (pp. 18-36). New York: Oxford University Press.

Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (2010b). Contemporary sociological approaches to schooling. In S. Davies & N. Guppy (Eds.). The schooled society: An introduction to the sociology of education (pp. 37-66). New York: Oxford University Press.

Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (2010c). Unequal student attainments: Class, gender, and race. In S. Davies & N. Guppy (Eds.). The schooled society: An introduction to the sociology of education (pp. 117-156). New York: Oxford University Press.

Freire, P. (2000). The Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuuum.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.

Harris, A. (2004). Jobs for the girls? Education and employment in the new economy. In A. Harris (Eds.), Future girl: Young women in the twenty-first century (pp. 37-62). New York: Routledge.

Jarvis, P. (2001). The age of learning: Education and the knowledge society. London: Kogan Page.

Jarvis, P. (2007). Globalisation, lifelong learning and the learning society: Sociological perspectives. London: Routledge.

Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Lifelong learning and underemployment in the knowledge society: A North American perspective. Comparative Education, 35(2), Special Number (21): Lifelong Learning and the Education of Mature Adults, 163-186.

Sèorlin, S., & Vessuri, H. M. C. (2007). Knowledge society vs. knowledge economy: Knowledge, power, and politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Stewart, T. (1997). Intellectual capital. New York: Doubleday.

What is unique and interesting about Orlowski’s analysis is that he draws on Marxist notion of class awareness and calls for “collective effort on the part of all minorities” (p. 264) to challenge white supremacist racial hierarchy. He suggests that working-class youths from different racial groups need to develop an awareness of social-class interests and realize that they have more in common with each other than with the European-Canadian capitalists. Just like other readings we have done in this course so far, Orlowski’s ethnography recognizes the role of education in nation-building––in particular, in imparting racist ideology and sustaining white hegemony; but on the flip side, it also embraces Paulo Freire’s notion of critical pedagogy and sees education’s transformative capacity to empower working-class minorities to counter racist national discourse and fight against different forms of oppression and inequality.

References:

Orlowski, P. (2001). Ties that bind and ties that blind: Race and class intersections in the classroom. In C. James & A. Shadd (Eds.), Talking about Identity: Encounters in race, ethnicity, and language (pp. 250-266). Toronto: Between the Lines.

One of the key sociological concepts Harris draws upon is subjectification. She discusses how the discourses of flexibility, limitless choice, and career success have been internalized by young women. These narratives together construct a subjectivity required by the modern economy as they shape the ways young women think about themselves – about what they can do and what they can be. Tied to this idea of ‘can-do’ or ‘can-be’ is the dilemma of ‘structure’ versus ‘agency’. The idea that all young women can transform their lives by pursuing education allows them to see themselves, and be seen, as subjects with agency. However, as Harris demonstrates, individual agency is limited by structural constraints. The problem is, when ‘public issues’ (such as structural barriers and public policies) take disguise of ‘personal troubles’ (individual agency), social inequality and structural malfunction are obscured and remain uncontested.

References:

Harris, A. (2004). Chapter 2: Jobs for the girls? Education and employment in the new economy. In A. Harris (Eds.), Future girl: Young women in the twenty-first century (pp. 37-62). New York: Routledge

M.I.A.: Born Free video frightens YouTube – Things That Go Pop!.

The work of man is only just beginning and it remains to conquer all the violence entrenched in the recesses of our passion and no race possesses the monopoly of beauty, of intelligence, of force, and there’s a place for all at the rendezvous of victory.

Aimé Césaire, Cahier d’un retour au pays natal

In his lecture The Myth of “The Clash of Civilizations” at the University of Massachusetts, Edward Said vehemently speaks against Samuel Huntington’s notion of cultural divisions and “rips” his thesis to shreds.

Samuel Huntington’s essay The Clash of Civilizations was published in the summer 1993 issue of Foreign Affairs. His states:

[…] the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural.

Huntington defines civilization as a “cultural entity” and divides the world into eight main civilizations: Confucian, Japanese, Hindu, Islamic, Orthodox, Western, Latin American and African. He argues that the principal clash of civilizations in the post-Cold War world politics will be between “the West and the rest” – and in order to win this clash, Western civilization must strengthen its unity and promote cooperation with nation-states that endorse Western values, and in the mean time, keep its opponents weak and divided by exploiting their differences. It is astonishing how explicit Huntington is while talking about forming alliances to sustain and expand Western power, and make all the civilizations more Western. The post-war imperialism attitudes and aggression are seeping out of every word!

Said refutes Huntington’s notion that civilizations are homogeneous entities that are separated from each other, and that differences among civilizations are fundamental and transcend time. He contends that “no culture or society is purely one thing”. There have always being communications and exchange among cultures, and migration has made today’s world a cultural compound in which no cultures or civilizations are insulated or stand-alone. Emphasizing cultural differences and pursuing dominance of one civilization over all the others, Said suggests, will not resolve conflicts among peoples – but intensify them; what we really need is a “new global mentality or consciousness that sees the dangers we face from the standpoint of the whole human race”, and to reconcile conflicts with “a sense of community, understanding, sympathy, and hope” instead of a sense of clash.

When Said is taking questions from the audience at the end of this lecture, someone asks, “What are the commonalities that can unite us?” Said responds that there are many commonalities among us, but we first have to “recognize them as actually having taken place.” He points out that education in most countries is nationalistic and has a great emphasis on learning “our tradition”, “our culture”, and “our language”. Said stresses the need to de-nationalize education so that people have the opportunities to learn about diverse cultures and realize that we live in a world of mixture in which cultures and civilizations cannot be simply separated from each other, and that certain ideas such as Apartheid and ethnic cleansing are wasteful and hopeless.

The Independent Media Centre (IMC) is an activist website that aims to provide and circulate grassroots and non-corporate coverage that the mainstream media often fail to offer. The IMC was first established in Seattle, U.S.A. in 1999. Through an independent and decentralized network, media activists have set up IMCs in Canada, Africa, Europe, Latin America, and Asia. Currently there are more than 150 IMCs around the world. Through a democratic open-publishing system, the IMC encourages people from anywhere in the world to become the media by publishing images, video and/or audio footages of current events on its website.

The IMC’s endeavour to challenge mainstream media reflects an ideological struggle in the sphere of civil society. While the mainstream media side by the powerful, the IMC is offering alternative media outlets for the powerless. The former shares some commonalities with what Gramsci (1971) refers to as organic intellectuals, who assist upholding the values of the ruling class; and the latter, is similar to traditional intellectuals who “regard themselves as autonomous and independent of the dominant social group” (Leroux, 2010, Slide 15).

References:

Gramsci, A. (1971). The intellectuals. In Selections from the prison notebooks (pp. 5-23). New York: International Publishers.

Leroux, D. (2010). Hegemony. [PowerPoint Slide]. Retrieved from: http://webct6.carleton.ca/webct/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct

Mickey Mouse Monopoly: Disney, Childhood and Corporate Power (2001) is a documentary examining Disney’s corporate power. It challenges the masses’ perceptions about Disney and Disney stories through unveiling the stereotypical representations of race and gender in Disney movies.

Linking to the concept of cultural circuit (Gay, Hall, Janes, Mackay & Negus, 1997), the identity of Disney as a company has been created and recreated through the visual representations of childhood fantasies. As a result, Disney has become the ultimate story teller for children around the world. Because the image of Disney is intimately tied with fairytales, the taken-for-granted public knowledge is that anything Disney represents or produces is innocent and safe. It is almost impossible to think of a company that makes movies and toys for children as dangerous or political.

When it comes to Disney products, it is amazing how discriminative parents and teachers are. The gender stereotypes and racial components in Disney movies are often overlooked because the assumption is that young children do not have the cognitive ability to notice and decode the underlying meanings of the visual images presented to them in imaginative forms. In Mickey Mouse Monopoly, Dr. Justin Lewis from Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff University points out that the way media affects us is not immediate, but through a subtle and accumulative process. He specifies:

The way media influences the way we think is […] a question of creating certain environment of images we grow up in and that we become used to and after a while those images will begin to shape what we know and what we understand about the world. (Section one: Disney’s Media Dominance, 2001).

Indeed, the power of media is hegemonic. Through presenting and representing images in particular ways, media constructs and sustains a whole set of beliefs and values that essentially become part of our common-sense knowledge. Mickey Mouse Monopoly provides examples of gender representations in Disney movies. The popular female characters such as princesses, fairies, and mermaids are typically slim. They have big eyes, fluttering eyelashes, fair skin, small waists, and big breasts. They talk softly, and move and act gracefully. Over the years, the image of females in Disney movies has not changed much. The characteristics of the popular female roles imply certain values – what kind of body type is mostly appreciated; how beauty is defined; and what behaviours are expected from a “proper lady”.

Racial stereotype is another major theme in Mickey Mouse Monopoly. In Peter Pan, Native Americans are depicted as savages; in The Lion King, Latinos and African Americans are violent street gangs; and in Lady and the Tramp, Asians are illustrated as disloyal and unreliable in the forms of Siamese cats. The most explicitly racist representation has been the opening song of Aladdin, the Arabian Nights:

I come from a land from a very far place, where the caravan camels roam;

Where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face.

It’s barbaric but hey, it’s home…

Regardless whether or not the intention was to make the song sound funny, the ignorance and prejudice between the lines are beyond words! Mickey Mouse Monopoly reports that Disney changed part of the lyrics, but still kept the last line “It’s barbaric but hey, it’s home” after Arab-Americans’ furious protest against the humiliating racial stereotype. In respond to that, New York Times’ one words says it all, “It’s racist but hey, it’s Disney!”

As one of the world’s biggest media corporation, Disney has an overwhelming influence on international popular culture. When a dominant Western corporation has the power to represent and circulate stories of other cultures and influence the way that children understand diverse cultures in the world, it really is playing a role of a “media educator” on a global level. This role gives Disney tremendous amount of power, but “with great power, comes great responsibility”. Disney should start to ask itself what kind of stories it is telling to the children around the world, and what kind of messages that the stories convey.

Whether or not Disney takes the responsibilities of educating the young during the processes of constructing childhood culture is a question of concern. There is always a possibility that Disney will be too busy rolling its giant profit snowball and too stubborn to make any positive changes. In that case, parents and educators will have to take on an extremely difficult but absolutely necessary task – learning to understand electronically produced visual representations, and guide children to “read” and think critically about the stories being played on screen by asking them simple questions after viewing (In case you are wondering – Yes, children are capable of critical thinking. And I will share some examples delightedly if you are interested!).

Cell phones have definitely become a part of our cultural universe because we know what it is and “we can talk, think about and imagine it” (Gay et al., 1997, p. 10). Wehave given it a set of social meanings through the ways in which we represent it and use it. The first cell phone, Motorola DynaTAC 8000, is known as the Motorola“brick” in North

Figure 1.1 Motorola 3200 (1987)

America. In China, it has a personified nickname – the “Big Boss”. Both “brick” and “Big Boss” are verbal representations regarding the size (maybe weight as well) of the cell phone. Other than the more obvious indication about size or weight, the name “Big Boss” is also able to link the object – cell phone – to certain groups of people. In order to understand what social identities were constructed in China at the time through representation in language, we must look at another means of representation – media, where the name Big Boss originated from. In late 1980s and early 1990s, organized crime was a dominant theme in Hong Kong movies. In those movies, the head of the gang was referred to as the “big boss”, and the very masculine Motorola cell phone was an essential prop that characterized the “big boss” on screen. This is not to imply that the first cell phone users in China had identified themselves with the gangsters. It was not the criminal acts that they identified themselves with; but the idea of mobility, leadership, power, and luxury life style. The first cell phone was launched in Guangzhou, China in 1987. Although the price was about ¥15,000 -25,000 (Chinese currency), it did not stop entrepreneurs, businessmen and construction contractors from purchasing cell phones. Through representation in language and media, cell phone became symbol of status and wealth in China during the 1980s.

Figure 1.3

Since late 1990s, cell phones have become smaller and more multifunctional. This new trend in cell phone production leads to different ways of representation in our cultural life. As cell phone becomes more affordable and portable, it has shifted from a symbol of status to metaphor of immediate communication. What makes cell phone appealing to us is that we can talk to people and hear their voice even when they are not in front of us (as long as they pick up the phone) – and we can do that whenever we want to and wherever suitable, while we are doing other things. In addition to the idea of staying connected when we are “out and about”, there are means of representation that produce other meanings and ideas about cell phones. As there are no restrictions that come from 2-year or 3-year wireless plans in China, people are able to buy new cell phones once they get tired of the ones that they are using. My mother, for example, has changed up to 8 or 9 cell phones in the past 3 years. Last time I talked to her through the webcam, she was bragging about her new Nokia 7280 which was advertised as “Distinctively Bold” on TV (to admire the glamourous Nokia 7280, please see Figure 1.2 and 1.3). My mother has always been fashionable, but she has neverstruck to me as the “bold” type. I guess Gay et al. (1997) are right about identification, in that “identification work(s) through language on the imaginary and on our desires” (p. 39). My mother may not have a luxury sports car (Figure 1.2) or actively participate in fancy evening parties (Figure 1.3), but perhaps the very stylish and sophisticated Nokia 7280 allows her to imagine herself living the lifestyle depicted in the cell phone advertisements. The best part about claiming an identity through consumption of cell phones in China is that one does not have to be locked in a particular identity for two or three years as we would in Canada. One could identify herself as being

Figure 1.4 L'Amour Collection: Nokia 7360, 7370, 7380

romantic and desirable as the woman in the L’Amour poster (Figure 1.4) for one year, as “smart and cool” as the pop star in the Xia Xin E606 advertisement (Figure 1.5) for another year, and claim to be traditional and classy as the lady in the MBO 308 image (Figure 1.6) for the next year. If one has the money, the interval between each identity could be even shorter.

Figure 1.6 Small and Cool: Xia Xin E606

Figure 1.7 Qi Pao Collection: MBO 308

If we consider the wireless plans in Canada as an example of what regulates cell phone usage, we can see how people’s styles of consumption differ when the regulation machanisms change. I would say that most people in Canada would not switch cell phones as often as a lot of people do in China. In the Chinese context, cell phones  are not only made meaningful as a communication device, but also became a metaphor of style and a statement of personality through practices of representation.

Gay, P. d., Stuart, H., Janes, L., Mackay, H., & Negus, K. (1997). Doing cultural studies: The story of the Sony Walkman. London: Sage Publications.

Cell Phone Advertisement: MBO 308 [Photograph]. Retrieved April 21, 2010, from: http://hiphotos.baidu.com/fand/pic/item/0172b0196660dc5243a9ad87.jpg

Cell Phone Advertisement: Nokia L’amour [Photograph]. Retrieved April 21, 2010, from: http://hiphotos.baidu.com/fand/pic/item/2db05aeed0af16ecb3fb9565.jpg

Cell Phone Advertisement: Nokia 7280 [Photograph]. Retrieved April 21, 2010, from: http://hi.baidu.com/fand/album/item/d2ded42a69f2663ad42af18d.html

Cell Phone Wall Paper – Nokia 7280 [Photograph]. Retrieved April 21, 2010, from: http://www.ew88.net/desk/business/567/d_23226.html

In the 90s, Cell Phone Was Symbol of Status [Photograph]. (2008). Retrieved from: http://www.dahe.cn/xwzx/zt/kjzt/3njbkhn/jy/t20081127_1436246.htm

Lin, J. H. (2009, September 28). Motorola 3200 [Photograph in web log message]. Retrieved from: http://www.bjbm.org/home/space.php?uid=5&do=blog&id=49

Li Yuchun Cell Phone Advertisement [Photograph]. Retrieved April 21, 2010, from: http://pic.dc.yesky.com/pic/bizhi/mx/177/495677d_9.shtml

On the web link that my friend sent along, singer Geoff Berner depicts the day that he was asked to write the Olympic theme song by the Premier of British Columbia Gordon Campbell. He goes on about how Campbell wanted a song that is able to tell the world what was really happening in B.C., what the Olympic games had cost and at whose expense… As far as hilarity goes, I was told by a very “reliable source” that the story that Geoff Berner was telling here about Campbell was nothing but a joke.

“The Dead Children Were Worth It” was written with honesty and imbued with irony. As someone who work with young children, I found the “babies’ corpses rising up from the melting snow” part of the song quite drastic and disturbing. However, I appreciate that this is exactly the kind of emotion that the song is meant to provoke. It makes us think about the things that are considered expendable when it comes to the Olympics.

Geoff Berner lists what had been done in B.C. to pay for the Olympic expenses:

“They closed courthouses, kicked the mentally ill off welfare, got rid of ambulance service in small towns, let homelessness more than double in Vancouver, illegally tore up all the government workers’ contracts … my favourite has always been their decision to eliminate the office that investigates the deaths of children in BC. A 4 million dollar savings!” (Penticton Art Gallery, 2009).

In my reflection National Pride vs. Democracy, I illustrate how the Chinese people thought that spending $40 billion on the Beijing Olympics was “worth it”, and how home demolitions were considered a necessary sacrifice for the Chinese nation during preparation for the Olympics. It doesn’t matter where the Olympic games are held, different hosting countries employ similar strategies to suit the needs of this two-week mega project; and the people of the hosting nations go alone with it. As my friend (who I mentioned at the beginning of this post) suggested during my conversation with her, that nationalism makes the people of a nation radical and irrational.