Global Kids' Online Leadership Program

First, we viewed The Shock Doctrine, a short film by Alfonso Cuaron and Naomi Klein based on her recent book of the same name. The film summarizes how CIA interrogation techniques developed in the 1950s have been applied on a global scale. Populations are “shocked” through war or political upheaval in order to pacify them as radical neo-liberal economic reforms are implemented. Next, we briefly discussed America’s Army, the free, online first person shooter released by the US Army as a recruitment tool. We then watched documentation of media artist Joseph DeLappe’s project Dead In Iraq. DeLappe logs in to an active America’s Army game, drops his weapon, and begins typing the name, age, branch of service and date of death for each American casualty in Iraq. Other players inevitably kick him off, and he simply signs back in to another game and repeats the process. Finally, we watched a CNN report on the Predator drone—America’s unmanned aerial vehicle. The Predator is a large remote controlled plane that is flown by pilots using joysticks and video screens based in either Iraq or Nevada. They perform reconnaissance and can also fire Hellfire missiles.

Reactions to the short videos varied from shock and outrage to tentative approval. The Shock Doctrine was shocking. Students, inured to violent movies and violent events in their neighborhoods, were nonetheless reduced to silence by scenes from 1950s mental hospitals and modern interrogation rooms. The clinical language of the CIA’s Kubark Counterintelligence Interrogation manual is somehow more disturbing than buckets of on-screen gore. A monotone description of how suffering should be inflicted on prisoners is more frightening than fictitious fangs gleaming in the darkness. There was deep contemplation as we discussed how the reality of interrogation techniques and economic upheaval relate to the rhetoric of making the world safe for democracy and consumer freedom. I fear seeping myself in economic theory, realpolitik, and current events has made me cynical. It was comforting to see young people getting emotional as they wrestled with issues of freedom and security, and what price the world should pay to ensure our comfort.

The video of DeLappe’s protest triggered a discussion of personal responsibility and video games. The students (like the larger world) are divided as to what effect violent video games have on players. Some felt people need to control themselves better, and not make excuses for their actions. Even those who don’t believe violent games have any effect on themselves, however, think younger, less reflective players could be susceptible. We ran out of time, unfortunately, and weren’t able to discuss DeLappe’s protest directly, and what good, if any, they felt it could do. We also weren’t able to show a video of a group of Iraq Veterans Against the War protesting America’s Army.

“I knew those things existed in video games and movies, but I never thought they were real,” said one wide-eyed student about the Predator drone. Some students were glad that new weapons technology keeps US soldiers farther from the front lines and out of harm’s way, but were distressed that such weapons could ultimately lead to escalating violence. One student drew parallels to the atomic bomb, another weapon initially justified as a way to save soldiers’ lives.

Teaching is part preparation and part improv; the ratio of one to the other varies every week. Yesterday, I planned to do more than could actually be accomplished. We had technical glitches and some organizational confusion. It happens. Despite those bumps, however, we also had what matters most: thoughtful minds eager to examine difficult issues. Our students impress me every week. They are growing up in difficult times and struggling to make sense of it the best they can. They want to do right in the world; we need to buy them time so they have a chance.