Stressed Test

The incessant tapping of that yellow number two pencil against the desk never seemed to end, just like the constant reminder of the score I received on my Scholastic Aptitude Test (the infamous SAT).

I remember every detail about that day, the pencil tapping especially. The poor fellow behind me must have been struggling on the critical reading section, because he just about tapped himself out of that stuffy room. To add insult to injury, he spewed his breakfast all over his test booklet and left a little bit of residue in my kinky hair.

This is the story I would actually prefer to tell my peers when I have to explain my SAT score. Unfortunately, this was not the case, and like many students in the United States, standardized tests are just another challenge to add to our already problematic lives.
John Oliver, the host of Last Week Tonight, uncovers the truth behind standardized tests in America in this video that went public in 2015. Before proceeding with this article, take some time to watch this short video in which Oliver explains what these tests are, and the horrors that occur because of them. As a graduating senior, I feel that it is important to address the pains that high school officials decide to place upon us. A commentary on Oliver’s intriguing video is long overdue.

He begins by explaining how standardized tests are made to look enticing, but after experiencing one, students’ opinions change dramatically. In fact, some students skip their tests, proving that either they are rebellious teenagers who do not want to do anything remotely educational, or that the tests are simply awful. These students may also be emotionally scarred by previous test experiences. Similar to my “SAT testing experience”, students sometimes become ill and have mental breakdowns during these (clearly traumatizing) tests. Funnily enough, such occurrences are not uncommon and clear instructions are provided by the proctor of the exam prior to the occurrence of an incident such as vomiting.

John Oliver proceeds by tracing the immense pressure America decides to give her students back to the 1990s. Back then, American students ranked low compared to other countries when it came to testing. Therefore, operations like “No Child Left Behind” and more recently “Race to the Top” were set in place to help with this national issue. This “needed” intervention, meant to help Americans increase test scores, managed to also triple the number of tests admitted in the country.

Apart from the sick students who cannot seem to catch a break, Oliver hit on another important aspect of standardized testing that some people may neglect to mention. Pearson Education has power over many American schools; students – this is the company to blame for most of your stomach ulcers and migraines. They control many standardized tests, in addition to other aspects of American education. Shockingly, to find graders for the tests, they post job openings on Craigslist. This is an issue that is not exclusive to Pearson Education. Some graders have spoken up and said that grades are not always based on merit, and sometimes they are even based on the last year’s scores. Therefore, if the company is looking to imitate the scores that students received the year previous, graders are instructed to give a certain number of two’s, three’s, four’s and so on. Essentially, graders are asked to see exam papers as a particular number, whether or not the paper is worth the score.

The US has gone through all of this trouble in order to improve the test-taking abilities of its students, and yet the test scores have not even improved dramatically since the changes took place. The injustices that go on after a student has suffered through these grueling exams is heartbreaking, and a better system for standardized tests needs to be established. Is the pencil-tapping induced stress that America is placing on students really worth it?

• Christy Mukolwe and Meredith McKelvey

The African Dream:Tradition, Federation and Independence

Pan-Africanism is an ideology that encourages solidarity between African people. This mindset encourages the unification of all Africans – this is a very powerful idea. We, as African people, are called to stand together and build one another up for the mutual benefit of the entire continent.

Africa has been globally labelled as the world’s poorest continent; in Sub-Saharan Africa alone, more than 218 million people live in extreme poverty.  Africa is also known to be the wealthiest continent, full of natural resources. This creates a paradox between extreme potential and extreme poverty. The continent also boasts the highest birthrate, and has the fastest growing economies and one of the best mobile phone markets in the world, second only to Asia.

Africa’s modern history has been defined by oppression from colonial powers that fragmented various communities and social groups. This caused incredibly weak infrastructures, resulting in an enormous dependence on foreign aid from the West, despite each country’s claim of independence. Why are the countries of Africa still in isolation and still reliant on the West after several decades of independence? According to Pan-African theory, it’s because we are trying to run on a non-African model. Under this model, each fragment of Africa is attempting to survive, while facing very high odds, alone. A Pan-African state would not only stand together politically, but share militaristic and economic goals. “If we were able to work together as a continent we wouldn’t have to rely on the West to help us process our resources”, Njeri Thuo – a high school student in Nairobi – stated when asked about the idea of Pan-Africanism.

With all things considered, a “United States of Africa” is an amazing idea that can only become a reality if we adopt a new model of state firmly rooted in African traditions and ways. Many Pan-Africans blame Western government transplanted to Africa as the root of some of the major problems on the continent. Mwayila Tshiyembe, a firm believer of inventing a multinational Africa, states that “the failure of the post-colonial state reflects a questioning of the will to coexist, and a loss of purpose and direction. The nations (or ethnic groups) are in fundamental disagreement about the community’s basic values. How are we to define a free society, authority that is properly conferred and shared, and law that seems to come naturally? State and society seem to have been in conflict ever since Africa’s plurinational societies saw their own model destroyed to make way for an enforced Western caricature.”

If the various nations in Africa could see one another as comrades rather than competitors, and help each other destroy problems such as corruption, we could stomp out poverty and civil unrest. We shouldn’t look to the West to solve problems that are specific to us. We shouldn’t look to adopt forms of government from other civilizations, but rather create various forms of government that work for us – and perhaps only us. As different African countries, we shouldn’t accept the hiring of other nations to build our countries up to their standards. We should understand that we are different, and that because we are different, we need to do something different. 

• Arthur Mahinda and Meredith McKelvey

 

Melting Pot or Not

Interracial marriages and multiracial families are something that are no longer considered rare or unheard of in many countries. They are becoming common in countries such as America, which prides its self on being a melting pot of many different cultures, races, and people. In other places, multiracial children are viewed as exotically beautiful, having picked up the best traits from each race. However when multiracial families or interracial marriages are displayed on advertisements, they are often met with a slew of racist and derogatory remarks, which are detrimental to the progress that advertisement companies are making concerning miscegenation.

On April 29, Old Navy, a well-known American clothing store, released an advertisement on social media which depicted a multiracial family. Almost immediately, the advertisement was met with racist social media comments such as “Absolutely disgusting. What’s next? Gender neutral bathrooms? Pedophilia acceptance propaganda?! Never shopping here again.” This was not the first time an advertisement depicting multiracial families has been attacked. Companies such as Cheerios have been attacked for daring to depict a multiracial family in their advertisements.

The problem is that America has long identified itself as a country of immigrants, a country of many cultures, a diverse melting pot. However, can a country be a melting pot if multiracial families are not accepted in marketing, and business? Many African Americans carry the traits and genes of more than one race; no one seems to have a problem with this as long as both parents are black. The problem seems to stem from having parents that are of different races – miscegenation. The verbally abusive anti-miscegenation attacks that some American marketing businesses are experiencing are yet another sign that the fight against racism is not over. What is worse is that America prides itself on being culturally diverse, and yet cannot except miscegenation. Carolina Johnson, a junior at Rosslyn Academy in Nairobi said, “I think it’s pretty insane at this point in time, in 2016, that people make those kinds of comments. I think that they show a face of society that we really have to try to diminish. To look at a family that is based on love, and say very demeaning things about them, that’s insane.” America has come pretty far in the fight against racism, but there is still a long way to go.

People often think that because slavery no longer exists in the shameless form it used too, slavery is over; it is not. And because segregation laws no longer exist, people can conclude that racism is over; it is not. Things such as racism cannot be solved simply by changing laws. Racism is a system of thinking in which a particular race is placed at the top of the chain, and this system of thinking drastically affects reality. Anti-miscegenation is only one example of the many problems that racism still brings.

It is dangerous to place value and identity in the colour of skin. Our races are simply boxes that society tries to put us in. Race is not an identity. Character is.

• Njeri Thuo

Come Together

It’s that time of the year again, when millions of Europeans come together to celebrate music through the Eurovision Song Contest. It’s a competition filled with nationalism, political controversy, interesting fashion choices and of course, tons of heartfelt ballads and interesting euro-pop performances that probably would sound quite bizarre in a different setting. And there has certainly been a few outrageous numbers in the competition that would have you exclaim ‘Only in Eurovision’, including old Russian ladies singing “Party for Everybody” while baking bread as a part of the choreography, a Romanian countertenor in black diamond embellished clothing. Oh, and Ireland´s Singing Turkey back in 2008.

However, Eurovision does not only contain crazy outfits and catchy songs. Politics often make their way into the arena. In the last few years, loud boos have echoed against the walls after Russia’s performances due to the outrage over the anti-HBTQ politics of the country, as well as the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Interestingly, these negative noises have been censored in previous years, but Sweden – this year’s host country – has decided to not censor the show at all. Sergey Lazarev, this year’s Russian competitor, is one of the favorites and says that Eurovision wants to keep politics out of the show and should do just that by censoring the boos. He says that a prospering gay community does exist in Russia and that a Russian victory this year would support it further.

The motivation behind the start of this loved and cherished contest was to unite Cold War Europe. Today, the competition is a friendly one between countries that once were at bloody war with each other. Sometimes things can seem a bit too friendly, when countries put their highest vote on their neighboring country in order to improve the bonds between their respective countries. This leads many to question the fairness of the competition. And in last year’s dramatically close battle between Russia and Sweden for first place, politics might have played a large part. Even though Russia’s competitor expressed her open mind and support of human rights and love, she was faced with deep criticism because of the negative attitude against the country in which she was born. If Russia wins this year, will that victory come without controversy? Probably not.

The turbulence and conflicts that are realities in our world today conflict with other areas – like music – and it seems to be hard to look beyond politics when judging an artist in a competition like the Eurovision Song Contest. As a politically interested person, I know that it can be hard to ignore the political views that certain nation’s governments represent, even when it´s about music. But I think that we all have to remind ourselves that a person can represent only him or herself – not necessarily always a country as a whole. At the end of the day, we shouldn’t have to worry about whether our actions and words are in complete agreement with the policies of our own countries in every aspect of life. We are all from this same world.

The theme of this year’s Eurovision is “Come Together”, and so perhaps we should do just that; we should forget the conflicts for once, and unite with the help of music and creativity.

• Carolina Johnson

Uber in Nairobi: The Death of the Taxi?

Uber launched in Kenya in late January. Its efficiency and convenience has quickly made the Uber concept popular across the world. But, for Nairobi, is Uber truly better than getting a taxi?

Most people would argue that Uber, compared to regular taxi services, is safer and more secure to ride. According to Alude, an Uber driver, “If an Uber driver decides to do something bad to a client, he can easily be traced through the system, so if you complain they will go through the record and find out who picked the personage and catch him.” Therefore, with the existence of a system, personal safety is almost guaranteed. Taxi drivers, on the other hand, don’t have a system that monitors their actions. The only thing that control them is morality. This doesn’t imply that all taxi drivers will take advantage of these lax roles. but most people are afraid of uncertainty, especially since Africa is often seen by the outside world as “unsafe”.

Another argument that people propose in favour of Uber is that it is more affordable than taking a taxi. However, experiences may call this idea into question. If an individual lives in Kileleshwa, next to Valley-Arcade in Nairobi, it will cost about 1,250 Kenya Shilling, or $12.50 to travel to the Gigiri area. This is around 250 shilling (or $2.50) more expensive than travelling by taxi. Uber’s price is determined by distance, and therefore if an Uber car gets stuck in a traffic jam it cam become unprofitable for the driver; as a result, often the criver will opt to take the longer route. This will increase the cost to the rider. However, since the route is ultimately up to the driver, the price does fluctuate. Because Uber uses shilling per kilometer, it becomes hard for passengers to correctly analyze how much the ride should cost. Most passengers don’t have a clear idea how far away their destination is, or how long it will take.

Having this in mind, Taxi’s are a different story. Since Uber uses a phone app to decide the final price, it’s very hard for passenger to bargain over the cost. In the case of a taxi, everything is negotiable. When the passenger arrives at the destination he or she can usually negotiate the price of the ride. Thus the decision is in the hands of the passenger as well as the driver. It can result in a good bargain for the rider.

Convenience is another factor. Uber is very convenient within Nairobi, but it only operates in Nairobi proper. So if a passenger wants to travel to Naivasha (a city outside Nairobi city limits), it would be difficult with Uber. This said, a taxi driver can drive a passenger to areas outside Nairobi such as Naivasha and Kisumu without any issue.

In general, the decision that a client needs to make between Uber or traditional taxis depends on the situation. The two main factors to consider are distance and how familiar you are with Nairobi. If you just want to travel within Nairobi and you are not familiar with any taxi driver, Uber is safer. But if you have lived in Nairobi for some time and are acquainted with a few taxi drivers, then taxis are the better choice. And, if you want to travel outside Nairobi, taxi are the only viable option.

Is Nairobi ready for the Uber movement? Most definitely! But does it mark the end of the taxi business? In my opinion, absolutely not. What do you think Nairobians?

• Bill Yang

Does Pop Affect Your Brain?

Dear Generation Z,

Should we be concerned about what contemporary music could be doing to our brains? Could classical music be better for our overall brain growth in the long run? Some scientists seem to believe that contemporary music could be damaging our intellectual power. According to this article, contemporary music may be hindering our creativity, and making us settle for less when it comes to our artistic abilities. This can be a little disheartening considering so many people, including myself, listen to and love contemporary music.

I took the liberty of interviewing three people who are more informed about music than I am, to get a broader opinion on this debatable topic. Daniel Bussey, a senior high school student interested in the benefits of music therapy and hoping to major in Voice Performance in college said, “Contemporary music is [not] bad for your brain . . . Due to classical music’s intricate structure the brain is particularly responsive to the genre of music. Although most contemporary [music] is not as intricately structured as classical music . . . contemporary music can definitely be used in positive ways . . . due to the upbeat nature of modern music . . .The brain actually gets quite excited when listening to it.” Bussey takes a stance that supports both contemporary and classical music. He recognizes the intricacy that classical music incorporates while still accrediting the positive aspects contemporary music brings to the table.

Amy Onyonyi, who will be attending The Boston Conservatory and studying Vocal Performance in a Bachelor of Music degree this fall stated that, “Studies show that classical music is better suited to positively stimulate the brain. Cows produced more milk listening to classical music than when listening to contemporary music . . . .  It ultimately depends on . . . how [a person responds] to different genres of music. Some people are more productive when listening to jazz and others when listening to sonatas [therefore] I can’t generalize and say that one is better for the brain than the other.” Onyonyi appreciates a plethora of music genres and would not put one above another. Her opinion is based on the fact that it is the individual’s choice.

After getting the idea to write about this topic from Audrey Statler – my current music teacher – I was interested in knowing what her standpoint was on this issue.  “I would hesitate to say that all contemporary music is worse for our brains than classical music . . . but being proficient as a classical musician does take more academic study than being proficient in contemporary music. On the whole, classical music is much more complicated and more difficult to understand . . . . Therefore [it] probably demands that we use more of our brains when listening to it.” Statler, a professional trained in music, knows from experience that classical music is more challenging than contemporary music. In her opinion, classical music is more stimulating, but contemporary music is not necessarily bad for one’s intelligence.

Obviously, this issue is not easily concluded. I would be reluctant to speculate on whether contemporary music is bad for one’s brain, but I can say that contemporary pieces are significantly simpler to learn than classical ones. Thankfully they are both different from each other, and bring an intriguing aspect of diversity to the music industry.

So, what do you think? Does the fact that your iPod is filled with pop music make you think you are at an intellectual loss, or do you think that you creativity levels are doing alright?

• Christy Mukolwe

Ivory Inferno

The Ivory Trade is nothing new to us; it has been going on for centuries. Novels have been written about it and speeches have been made in bid to stop it, but poachers seem to always have a way to obtain ivory. Security is never enough. Today, we know the Ivory Trade to be the commercial, illegal trade of the ivory tusks of – most commonly – Asian and African elephants. Ivory has been valued since ancient times for such things as manufacturing, art, false teeth, fans, and dominoes.

Poachers are now slaughtering up to 35,000 of the estimated 500,000 African elephants every year for their tusks. With a pound of ivory fetching as much as $1,500 on the black market, and the rhino horn raising as much as £54million ($80 million) – more than gold or cocaine – it is obviously a problem of massive proportions.

It is absolutely sickening that poaching continues, and that innocent animals are being decimated for their ivory, only for pieces made of this substance to end up as dusty trinkets on shelves of wealthy people that will forget about them eventually or sell at a higher price.

On Saturday 30th April 2016, ivory from about 8,000 dead elephants went up in thick smoke. Twelve towering piles of ivory – £68m ($100m) worth – were incinerated in Kenya’s Nairobi National Park. Lighting the fire to what has been described as “the world’s largest stockpile of ivory and rhino horns” confiscated from smugglers and poachers, Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta demanded a total ban on ivory in order to end the ‘murderous’ trafficking. The event marked the nation’s fourth such burn, raising awareness about the importance of protecting animals and rejecting illicit business at their expense. This symbolic act shows Kenya’s stance on wildlife poaching. “From a Kenyan perspective, we’re not watching any money go up in smoke,” Kenya Wildlife Service Director General Kitili Mbathi said. “The only value of the ivory is tusks on a live elephant.”

While the burns are setting records, conservationist groups have noted that there’s still more work to. And Kenya is seeking a total worldwide ban on ivory sales when the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) meets in South Africa later this year, as poaching poses an increasing risk to the species.

Celebrities, including actress Kristin Davis, attended the event to show support. Representing the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust, a Kenyan organization that rescues orphaned baby elephants, she said: “It’s very sad to see so much ivory in one place. I have no doubt that tusks from mothers of some of the orphaned baby elephants are in those piles.”

I was sadly not able to attend this event, but Rhea Chakrabarti, student and member of the “Hands Off Our Elephants” campaign managed to witness the spectacle. When asked about her thoughts on the event she replied, “When I was confronted by the 105 tons of ivory stacked up awaiting cremation, it was simply too much to take in. It baffled me how the ivory was stacked in a way that made it seem so beautiful. The tusks had writings on them, their weight and location -the little things. The pyres of ivory represented the lives of 8000 elephants. 8000 elephants. It’s disgusting just saying that…The ivory burning might seem controversial, but being there compared to nothing else I have experienced – it was beautiful and heartbreaking. Our government and many different organizations stood together for one common goal: to not let this happen again. The ivory burning was a step in the right direction for Kenya, [and] it sent a well-needed message to poachers, and hopefully next year there will be nowhere as close to the amount of ivory that was poached.”

Kenya’s ivory is not for sale! This trade means death – of both our elephants and natural heritage. I am a proud Kenyan living in this beautiful country, and I am proud that our country took a stand for its elephants and sent a message – one that I hope that transforms into action.

• Riyah Hadi

What Are You Wearing?

Shop till you drop! For many, trying and buying clothes is an enjoyable way to pass the day; for some people, clothes shopping helps to make them feel good and relax. These days, thinking ethically while shopping for clothes is getting more common and trendy, because a sad reality exists behind the glitzy world of the clothing industry. In a blog entitled “The Conscience Collective”, blogger Stacy Hope combines views on fashionable style with a more ethical and sustainable focus. According to Hope, “Who made my clothes?” is a question shoppers should find very important.

The unethical ways of many textile producers within the fashion industry include unfair working conditions and exploitation of poorer countries, as well as unsustainable treatment of land and soil and excessive environmental damages (such as excessive water drainage and use of harsh chemicals). Tracking clothes back to where and how they were produced shows the true face of the clothing industry; child labor, low salaries and factories where human rights are ignored. Some “Western” clothing brands use the sad realities of poverty in many countries to their advantage, gaining cheaply manufactured clothes in order to rake in huge profits. Though this “tracking” is hard work, to those concerned about ethical clothing and sourcing, it is important.

“The Conscience Collective” proves that great fashion and style can be combined with sustainable production. If a person is interested in both fashion and environmental and ethical concerns, it is important to make wary choices as a consumer. How can we choose wisely?

Here’s a “starter list” of some good tips for finding great sustainable and ethical outfits:

• When you buy your clothes, skip the plastic bag! Bring your own fabric shopping bag – already, you have taken one important step on the path to reduce your global footprint.
• Wait for one more wear before you clean your clothes! Often, we feel that a shirt is “dirty” after one use; this could use some rethinking. Changing the attitude on this issue can be hard for a lot of us, yet the benefits to the environment are worth it! And, there are other wash-related steps we can take, like using eco-friendly detergents and air-drying the clothes as often as we can.
• Choose local! Locally produced clothes have obvious environmental advantages and often ethical ones as well, since the control over a smaller business is much greater than in mega-factories, and you as a consumer can know more about the production.
• Don’t trash it! About 21 billion clothing items are thrown out in the United States every year and numbers are high in many other countries as well. NEVER throw clothes away if they are usable. Rather, donate, trade with a friend, or sell your gently used duds.
• Shop second-hand! I absolutely love second hand clothes and so should you! It´s a great way to find unique clothes without supporting the wasteful industry of today.
• Do some research! When it comes to finding ethical clothing you need to ask questions and be curious. Regardless of how stylish and cheap their clothes may be, Primark, Forever 21 and H&M (except their Conscious line) do not use ethical labor methods. In a jungle of companies who exploit workers, it can be hard to make conscious decisions. But when you are wearing something that both looks fabulous and is fabulously produced it will be worth it!

• Carolina Johnson

How to Get into College

Dear Admissions Office,

My name is (insert name here). I am qualified for your university for the normal reasons, i.e. higher education is a social necessity, I actually do love learning / I’m a genius, or my future career requires deeper knowledge of one subject, like neurosurgery. Apart from these substandard motives, I spent one week abroad in Africa complaining about the food, taking selfies with black children, and generally trying to force a radical life experience upon myself before the deadline for college applications.

During my time there, I played seven and a quarter hours of soccer with a bunch of school children with exactly three soccer balls that, collectively, cost me sixty dollars and ninety – nine cents. However, it was a worthy investment for a worthy goal…

The mud on the pattern of the soccer balls, I think, represents the relationships between Africa and the West. While there is some dirt and general lack of clarity, it is very possible to connect over something as simple as a game of soccer (nevermind that in Africa, “soccer” doesn’t really exist). As someone with enough money and ambition to travel to Africa for one week, I realized that I can bridge this gap between Western luxury and the beautiful cultures of everywhere else. I can play soccer in the mud with African school children, and take some pretty great selfies too (just look at my Facebook and Instagram accounts, as I’m sure you already have). Could this qualify me for a scholarship? Maybe.

I am an innovator of the future – someone with excellent taste in soccer balls and the ability to improvise whatever random, introspective enlightenments are necessary to raise my chances of getting into your educational institution.

Sincerely, (Your Name Here)

 

Dear Applicant,

Though you are deemed to be more than capable and willing to attend our university, unfortunately we cannot admit all competent applicants into this university. We receive thousands of applications each year from many impressive young men and women who all qualify for a position at this university. As a result, we have a very narrow process of selection (and you, despite your eagerness, were simply not interesting enough. At this point, you should know that a single week in Africa is not enough cultural “experience” to get into this university. In fact, we’re a little shocked that you didn’t spend at least ten days in Africa, and, furthermore, that you didn’t post at least thirty pictures per day onto your Facebook account. As for your introspective “enlightenments” – while they were profound, they were simply too unoriginal).

We wish you all the best in your journey to higher education!

Sincerely,  An Office of Undergraduate Admissions

 

Getting accepted by a well-known university is a difficult task, especially as many universities base their prestige on how selective they are. While it’s understandable that profound cultural interactions are the key into universities that desire to reflect diversity, trying to conform to these standards doesn’t mean that one is a leader. In fact, stooping to these requirements shows an intense lack of originality and consideration for the people one is interacting with just to get that golden ticket.

Pippa Biddle, on her website, expands on the “detrimental effects” of Western volunteerism in developing countries. Even with a well-meaning intention to help reinforce infrastructure and combat poverty, there are many ways to do so rather than a glamourous voyage across the world. When and if universities finally jump onto an anti-volunteerism bandwagon, college admissions may be more welcoming. 

But for now, some advice for all of you potential College students: when Western pressure turns third-world children and cultures into hoops, don’t join in the circus. Intentionality is everything. 

• Meredith McKelvey

Trapped in an Elevator

A young boy is trapped in a building that’s on fire; you are safely outside waiting for the firemen who don’t seem to be coming. Do you try to save the boy? Or, someone is being verbally abused on the bus; do you stand up and defend the person from the bullies?

Has a self-centered culture – the norm in many countries around the world – created a world where intervening when others need help is seen as foolish instead of courageous?

Social experiments concerning civil courage can be found on YouTube by the dozens. For example, a video posted last year of a young couple (who, as it turned out, were actors) in an elevator, where the boyfriend began to verbally and physically abuse the woman with him stirred up some serious debate. According to the experiment, only one person in fifty three would have stepped in to help the girl. Is this acceptable?

Even though these types of social experiments do show some sad flaws in our society, we have to remember that they often are problematic. 74% of Americans know someone that has been a victim of abuse. To many of the people who take part in these experiments, abusive situations are not new. Seeing someone go through abuse publically could conjure personal memories from similar situations, which can elicit a fear response. Fear, in turn, can be paralyzing, and a person can suffer tremendously from these situations. “Imagine being trapped in an elevator” – these words alone can create a feeling of anxiety due to a person’s similar experiences with abuse. Do we expect a person in this state to help the victim? An individual might say that her own life story of abuse would make her more prone to step in because she knows what it is like to be in an abusive situation and have no one lifting a finger to help them. For others, the opposite reaction might occur.

Civil courage looks different depending on where you are in the world. Some countries have laws making it a crime to refrain from helping a person in danger, while other countries – such as Sweden – do not. The way we see people risking their own lives to save someone else’s becomes a question of bravery versus foolishness, depending on where you are.

The issue about civil courage is a lot deeper than what one would initially expect. At first, you might think that there is only one possible answer; it´s always the right reaction to step in and help someone in danger, and always the wrong reaction to look the other way. Or you might think that we do not have responsibility for other people and should only mind our own business.

Perhaps the truth lies in between these two perspectives. There may be a balance in being brave and risking more than your own life when you enter a situation you do not have the capability of handling. When we have the capability we should always do our best to help our fellow human beings in this world full of hardships and abuse.

Perhaps, most importantly, before judging others for their action or inaction, we should remind ourselves that we just don’t know what other people have lived through.

• Carolina Johnson