Qotd: The Value of the Qotd

“Qotd: Do the Qotds we are accustomed to taking part in make us better national citizens as opposed to global ones?

The value of the Qotd feeds on, and feeds, the Value of her/im who attempts to answer it and the subsequent Value placed on the global Questions that sorely need an answer.

If we look at the Qotds put out by Vox,

…we will find that it focuses us on our personal lives, which, at the same time, serves to unite other Voxers with similar or complementary perspectives with ourselves – as the saying goes, similarity attracts.  However, given Vox’s nationalistic stance – ‘be a good Vox citizen’ – as illustrated, amongst others, by their not accommodating comments from other (blog)‘nationals’ or (non-blogging)’stateless’ denizens of the digisphere, this ‘unifying’ tactic – albeit unintentional – bodes unwell for Voxers’ development into global and active ‘cosmopolitan’ citizens – something that is sorely needed to address global problems.  These Qotds basically reinforce 'Voxers' focus on themselves(egocentrism) and forming ties with selfsame Voxer-others(nationalism).  Forming unities via these (Qotd) means and only within a 'Vox-is-for-all only if all-become-Voxers' scenario only serves to strengthen the ‘nationalistic’ perspective within ourselves whilst compromising the empathetic instinct’s application on a global scale.  In this, the Vox experience mirrors that which has been going on in the global nation-state based stage.

I am not saying that the current version of Qotds ought to be done away with.

It is indeed therapeutic and intellectually gainful to be able to talk about our individual selves, experiences and tie up with others of similar minds as the psycho-intellectual role and significance of ‘social support’ and ‘validation’ in helping us cope with life cannot be understated.  However, this ought to be complemented with macrocosmic, as opposed to the current ‘microcosmic’, Qotds, which goads us to go beyond our personal lives and selves, and interest ourselves in the interests of what we have been trained to view – via our nationalistic experiences – as ‘others’ (‘others’ is an excuse and justification for not being ‘as empathetic’).

Thus, I would, for instance, recommend BBC’s version of the ubiquitous ‘Qotd’ - which the BBC terms, ‘Have Your Say’.  We should divide the ‘Day’ part of ‘Qotd(ay)’ between the self and the world and not allow the ‘day’ to be monopolised by the Self alone - which will eventually serve to redefine and globalise the Self.  If the ‘questions’ we are asked from day to day focuses us on ourselves, we will not develop beyond the intellectual/perspectival milieu that it takes to answer such questions.  When we engage in global Qotds, we will find ourselves acquiring and becoming practiced in global perspectives that will be exceedingly helpful in countering our own personal/national problems.  If we trace the lineage of many of the problems we are faced with in this dire age, we will realise that, many a times, it finds its root in gross self/national-absorption which in turn promotes that degree and type of empathetic deficiencies that it takes to give life to such problems.

A blog does not have to solely be egocentrically ‘personal’.  In fact, the current version of the ‘blog’ betrays our idea of ‘personal’ as that which paradoxically denotes our dislocation from the world whilst being within it.  We may have started out as egocentric children, but this does not justify our constantly being a child, or mean that we cease to be egocentric when we graduate to 'adulthood' does it? - especially where such childish egocentrism allows much evil to continue unchallenged.  It is about time that ‘bloggers’ take global issues seriously and personally because whether bloggers are aware of it or not, it impacts on their every thought/thoughtlessness and choices they make.  What’s not ‘personal’ about that?

If you say, "I am a 'blogger', and by definition, it is a 'myspace' where i will involve my self in my interests', then i have to ask, "In what capacity then will you be trained to take on the responisbility of global citizenship'?  We are 'mother', 'father', 'daughter', 'son', 'citizen', 'friend', 'heterosexual', 'homosexual', 'bisexual', 'employee' and 'blogger'.  All of these focus one on the self and little besides.  These roles that we are given a 'choice' to take basically removes the choice of global citizenship and conscientiousness.  

Thus, besides attempting to answer and ‘submit’ the self-centred questions Vox accords prominence to – which indirectly serves to promote and practice us in self-centredness – and which perfectly complements Vox’s nationalistic stance – we should consider, amongst others, BBC’s ‘Qotds' such as, and amongst others,

‘How Did Israel Handle the War?’

‘Secularism or Islam in Turkey?’

‘What Fuels Anti-Americanism?’,

You don't have to be an Israeli, a Lebanese, a Palestinian, a Secularist, a Muslim, a Turk, an anti-American or an American to attempt to answer the above.  Just a blogger who views the 'global' and the 'personal' as pertinent occupants of 'my space'.

Many nationalised (outside the digisphere) Voxers/bloggers..

…have been well-trained in focusing on ‘their own’ personal and national (with either promoting the other) issues or those that they obviously impact directly upon either.  This, in turn, serves to define what ‘personal’ and ‘national’ means, along with the related boundaries within which their empathetic instinct ought to be reflexively practiced.  In the current milieu, the microcosmic counterpart of the ‘national’ is the ‘self’, and the macrocosmic counterpart of the ‘self’ is the ‘national’ - as ‘self’ and the ‘national’ are perceived to have immediate or direct impact on each other.  There is no doubt that we are born being focused on our own interests in our efforts to adapt and bring about a positive goodness-of-fit between ourselves and our immediate environment.  However, our continuing along this egocentric (under)developmental trajectory does little good for the progress of the global status quo which, in reality, impacts on us all the time whether we are aware of it.

Voxers/bloggers, by being assailed by BBC-type Qotd’s will be reminded that their focus is deficient when it excludes or is disinterested in global affairs – which leads to preoccupation with Vox’s egocentric Qotds.  It is this feeling of inadequacy that is thus engendered that will hold the potential of leading to, in this context, positive evolution where the macrocosm is not seen as the ‘nation-state’ but the ‘world’, and the microcosmic ‘self’ is redefined and appreciated as being an active and interested part of that world.  As a result, more knowledge will be sought to bring about the same goodness-of-fit between themselves and an increasingly globalised universe as suggested by macrocosmic Qotd’s such as that put forth by the BBC.  

It is then that the idea of the ‘Self’ will itself evolve and become cognizant of its occupying a significant node in what is indeed, and ought to be, a world wide web of global conscientious citizenship.

ed-infinitum

uk  usa  malaysia  singapore  india  philippines  hong+kong  qotd  bbc  blogging  nationalism  globalisation vox sociology philosophy psychology