Post on 27-Jul-2016
description
Page | 1
Table of Contents
Committee Introductions 2
Technology & Economics 3
Equality 6
Security 9
General Evaluation 12
Message from the Editor
When I initially thought of leading the
Media Team of the Revolutionary
Minds Conference, I had no idea where
this path would take me, as I have
never been the editor in any conference
of this kind. On this final day of RMC,
I feel that all the hard work and effort
put into it was totally worth it, as we
have formed strong friendships
between us, we shared amazing content
with the participants and we managed
to have tons of fun while doing it.
Being the editor of the Revolutionary
Minds conference was one of the best
experiences I’ve had! This is primarily
because of my wonderful team of
journalists and officials who were
always focused and dedicated to their
tasks.
Andreas Nicolaou
Page | 2
Revolutionary Minds Conference Committees
Security:
Safety. A priority that is necessary
for the sustainment of our tediously
delightful routines. It is for this reason
that our delegates have gathered in
order to ensure that the issues of
security are masterfully resolved.
Proudly presented by Zoe Kassinis
and Yiolanti Maou.
Equality:
The reminiscent scenes that come to
our minds when we regard the most
assertive committee of the conference
are - Nearchos Aniliades and Sotia
Petrou maintaining the delegates
within a prominent atmosphere of
discussion about equality concerns.
Technology & Economics:
The merging of two committees into
“one” having their own schematic
structure; the chairs: Iryna Friyavena,
Eftichia Constantinou, Giorgos
Hajipavlis and Milica Vukadinovic
had improvised and prudently
constructed an abstract coherency of
the two discussions.
Page | 3
Technology & Economics By Christos Nicolaou & Marcos Shukuroglou
The usage of technology, inhibited in our social structural foundation leads to
the direct treatment of people as “tools”, purely valued for their functionality in
correspondence to manufactured (industrial) products.
- Immanuel Kant
To exploit others is to take unfair advantage of
them. Although ‘exploitation’ has figured
prominently in Marxist theories, it is
frequently invoked in ordinary moral and
political discourse. This entry surveys various
definitions that have appeared in the literature,
attempts to identify the core elements of
exploitation, and then considers its moral
force.
A word that entails the entirety of humanity.
Ever since Prometheus stole the fire from the
Olympians, we've been trying to reach them
and even go beyond. The fact that our life
expectancy is so high, and that our parents
could expect our births without worrying that
we might die is a godlike achievement.
The Odyssey, to our excitement, might never
end. The committee of Technology will have
to investigate the possibilities that this century
offers to the evolution of our livelihoods.
Every aspect of development will be under the
microscope, in order to ensure that these
breakthroughs might be at least as important as
the ones that came before them.
War never changes. It's means, however
change by the minute. The military has always
pushed some parts of technology forward, and
we must always ensure that these pushes don't
throw us over the edge. How can losses as well
as damages be minimized? This is where our
delegates come in.
To reach the Olympian Gods, we must travel
to their home. Yet, space has been neglected in
the past few decades. How do we re-kindle the
fire? The possibilities that the cosmos offers
are endless, and hence, we cannot just let it
remain stagnant.
Very soon, 40% of professions will be
unemployable. This is not reason for concern,
for it will be caused by automation. The easing
of our burdens is a task that must be dealt with
carefully, if it is to be done efficiently. Our
delegates will have to discuss on how this can
be done properly.
The Technology committee has a great task
ahead of it. The future gives us the opportunity
to steal fire from the Gods once again. This
undertaking will be the main focus of
discussions. Discussions that will surely be
exciting.
Are refugees a barrier to economic
prosperity?
A question posed on the second day of the
conference. The Chair had presented a
sequence of 5 solutions. Border check for
identification purposes (if possible). Reduced
benefits (below National Minimum Wage) + 6
Page | 4
month limitFree education for everyone (eg.
teach the language) Abolish refugee camps
and replace it with asylum housing
Occupational training.
Are austerity measures effective in
achieving economic recovery and social
stability?
ADVANTAGES OF AUSTERITY MEASURES:
The delegates contained their response by
concisely stating that the advantages of
austerity measures would include: “Decrease
in debt to achieve favorable government
finance”.
DISADVANTAGES OF AUSTERITY MEASURES:
As the discussions swiftly developed flo , the
disadvantages of austerity measures were
renounced as: “Unemployment, which may le
ad to mental problems and affect health
Poverty and consequential increase in crime
rates”. “Possibility of inflation”. “Fall in
standard of living”. “Uneven distribution of
income, which will cause an increase in the
income gap, and will have an effect on middle
class.” “Reduced environmental care.” “Fall in
the rate of economic growth due to the fall in
GDP-Failing tourism industry”. “Less
investments thus less opportunity for
innovations.” “Existing opportunity costs.”
Chair’s Overview
Speaking overall, we have had a few troubles
along the way which were eventually
successfully resolved by both the chairs
managing to adapt to the situation, organizers
who didn't waste a minute to help, as well as
understanding from the delegates themselves
(and playing along quite a few times).
Concerning the resolutions/conclusions - the
task was quite challenging since the topics
were important in actuality and covered big
issues in general. The delegates possess
extensive and impressive knowledge which
helped them to back up their arguments. That
was, in return, the main problem as with many
aspects to consider it was hard to concentrate
on the actual question and find a perfect way
to solve it. Thus, the main problem for us was
to find a way of how to analyse the
question/problem at hand, come up with
working solutions and further reach a final
conclusion.
Though I must admit the debates were
challenging as a few delegates tended to be
biased and would pick only one side of the
argument, so it was difficult to motivate them
oppose their own views. The delegates are able
to change from a playful to a serious
atmosphere quite easily, which does help to
brighten up talks about economics and
technology topics. That is, of course,
sometimes a distraction, but it sure keeps the
atmosphere neutral, and delegates are able to
adequately discuss the issues. What surprised
me was the fact that even at breaks the
delegates preferred to talk about the committee
topics and that helped to raise the spirits and
sometimes to negotiate, too.
Page | 6
Equality By Eleni-Maria Papachristodoulou
“That October, my maiden aunt came to visit me in the hospital nursery. I was a
day old, and she found a little tag on my bassinet that announced, “It’s a Girl!”
In the next bassinet was another newborn whose little tag announced, “I’m a
Boy!” There we lay, innocent of a distinction—between a female object and a
male subject—that would shape our destinies. It would also shape Beauvoir’s
great treatise on the subject.”
-Simone De Beauvoir
The concept of equality is close to the hearts of virtually everyone as, one could argue, no one is
immune to bias. But how does one define equality? Where is equality even applicable? Revolutionary
Minds is here to find out by challenging participants to consider:
The issues that arise as a result of gender inequality and what measures could be implemented
to promote gender equality in certain aspects
What are the effects of racial inequality and what can be done to ensure that people are treated
fairly and equally despite their racial background?
What can be done to ensure the safety and global establishment of equal rights for LGBT
rights?
So with a topic so relevant to all, so applicable to almost every person, why do we still not have equal
rights? Why are certain ethnicities targeted more than others? Why does the colour of one’s skin or
the gender with which they identify define them for the rest of our lives? And why does the body from
which the voice comes from matter more than the voice itself? These are the questions we are
challenged to think about not only as Revolutionary Minds participants but as a human race itself.
Equality solutions:
Gender inequality: What issues arise as a result of gender inequality and what measures could be
implemented to promote gender equality in aspects such as education, health care, the labor market,
and representation in political and economic decision-making processes?
Day two has begun the smell of frappe, excitement and desperation is in the air as equality prepares
for yet another day of debate and solution making. So with speeches and participation from almost all
delegates, with topics such as “the aggression gene” and education coming into question regarding
equality, the committee had come to some conclusions. To further promote gender equality, there
needs to be increased education for women, improvements in public health, more child care facilities,
and availing women equal voice in cultural, social, economic and political spheres of public life. The
collaboration of local communities, institutions, national authorities and international bodies is
essential to influencing change and promoting the value of women. They all must act in concert with
Page | 7
respect to communication, education, leadership, and cultural norms and traditional values in order to
shift the attitude and mindset of the population in favour of gender equality.
Food for thought: It is worth mentioning that when all participants of revolutionary minds were asked
about gender inequality the majority agreed that there is an inequality but modern feminism is not the
way to combat it with many male participants admitting that they would consider themselves
feminists but only in the 20th century sense.
What happened in equality?
Media log - Day One
The day started simply enough: delegates and officials were energetically partaking in team building
activities, friendships were made, Nerf guns were shot, all in the preparation of the heated debate to
follow.
Debate 1: Gender inequality
The question was simple: What comes to mind when you think of gender inequality. The answer: Job
opportunities, social inequality and the ever so controversial wage gap. This topic produced a fruitful
debate with highly opposing views in which the difference in physical ability between the sexes was
used as an explanation for the pay gap; with some thinking it is an unfair comparison of the sexes
(where a delegate compared the wage of a male CEO with a female cleaning lady) with others
considering it as an integral part of gender inequality.
Debate 2: Racial Inequality
This debate was not quite as controversial with the general consensus being that racism is a very real
problem that affects many but is in fact manipulated by the media. The discussion soon progressed to
police brutality especially since –according to one delegate- 32% of black people shot last year were
unarmed, proving yet another huge part of the inequality certain races face today. It is also worth
mentioning the agreement that the word ‘’racist’’ is used very liberally but that doesn’t mean that
racism isn’t very relevant today.
Debate 3: LGBT rights
Much like Debate 2 this topic didn’t spark quite as much controversy with the general consensus
being that there is in fact a huge inequality towards LGBT individuals that needs to be combated.
To sum up, society’s questions and opinions can easily be seen through this small sample of people
with all ideas and ethical viewpoints considered, producing a fruitful yet respectful debate overall.
Page | 8
Chair’s Overview
The first day for the Equality Committee was a
very productive one. While presenting the
topics, the delegates had a chance to
brainstorm and discuss points centred around
gender, racial and LGBTQ+ inequalities. After
some ice breakers and energizers, Equality
split up into respective teams and constructed
their own rendition of a cohesive "resolution",
aimed to tackle some of the most serious
issues in regards to the topics. The delegates
were active, engaged and very comfortable
with the debate. Lots of laughter, surprise
visitors trying to fix the air conditioning (I'm
looking at you, El Presidente), calm
background music, intense committee work
and a "What’s in my Mouth" challenge all
sum-up the day at equality. Well...mostly!
Page | 9
Security By Christos Nicolaou & Marcos Shukuroglou
Security is a very strong ideal. The continuation of our daily lives
depends on security. This is why the delegates have an exciting
adventure awaiting them.
“According to received doctrine in scholarship and general intellectual discourse, the prime
goal of state policy is “national security.” There is ample evidence, however, that the
doctrine of national security does not encompass the security of the population. The record
reveals that, for instance, the threat of instant destruction by nuclear weapons has not ranked
high among the concerns of planners. That much was demonstrated early on, and remains
true to the present moment.”
– Noam Chomsky
The perks of being secure are vast. We all
want to go to bed with a degree of certainty
that tomorrow we will wake up alive, go to
safe schools and workplaces, and then back
home. The issue of security as such, however,
is far from simple.
It is for this reason that the committee of
Security exists. They are here to ask the
questions that matter in regards to our safety.
Take for example, the “rivalry” between
Security and Privacy. Taking the “Apple V
U.S. Government” case and the encryption of
the San Bernandino shooters’ IPhones, the
committee will delve into the delicate
problems that arise in balancing these two
concepts. Which of the two ideals is more
important? That’s what the delegates are here
to answer.
The topic of Terrorism is a very current topic,
obviously. The Brussels and Paris attacks have
forced us to reconsider the concept of Security.
Every aspect, from the influx of refugees to
the functionality of the Schengen Agreement is
fair game in discussion. Our delegates will
attempt to make a cohesive, rational and
complete policy that will entail everything that
matters in terms of Security.
The right to bear arms and its implications.
Debates have been going on and have been
very heated. This right is based on a
constitutional amendment, and many consider
it to be a sacred human right. Our delegates
have a long way ahead of them. If people will
be allowed to bear arms, the legislations will
have to ensure that guns are secure and that
sensitive groups are protected.
Page | 10
The Security committee had a very, VERY
heated debate session. The solutions that they
came up with were very complex and very rich
in detail. This is but a sample of the exciting
work that was done.
On the question of Terrorism we had some
intriguing and unexpected ones. Following the
examples of PLO in 1974, one delegate
recommended that Terrorist Organisations like
ISIS should be invited to speak at the UN.
Understanding the difficulties of defining
terrorism as an act, they also stressed the fact
that it is important to identify that terrorism is
a source of domestic, long term social
problems, and that it can take different forms.
Ehen the question of refugees and their strain
on a country came up, the idea that there
should be a quote of refugee admissions per
country came up. It was agreed that this quota
should be based on the country’s GDP, HDI
and population density. The country’s priority
should be to maintain the welfare of the
citizens.
It is a fact that people are drawn into terrorist
organisations through sophisticated electronic
propaganda. Our delegates recommended that
a group of IT specialists should be set up to
shut down the websites of terrorist
organisations and pages on social media.
It was also agreed that a percentage of national
budgets should be redirected towards national
security
Gun laws and their implications were the focus
of very extensive research. The solutions here
were just as intriguing.
It was agreed that Semi-automatic and
automatic guns that have ammo clips with
more than 10 bullets should be restricted to
only SWAT and Military. It was also agreed
that in order to use and carry guns, one must
be subjected to background checks, age
restrictions,
Finally, it was agreed that there should be a
preference towards non-lethal arms when
prioritising self-defence gun laws.
There were other solutions, but the committee
was too prolific for just one small article. The
fact of the matter is that the solutions were
extremely detailed and that the debate
produced very profound results.
Page | 11
Chair’s Overview
Saturday in the Security committee was fun!
Even the initial technical difficulty of being
unable to turn off the climate control which
was set to 27 degrees, baking delegates and
chairs alike, added an excitement to the tense,
heated debate. The delegates were passionate
and interested and after engaging icebreakers
of snowball and a girls vs. boys hula hoop
challenge, brainstorming on the first,
controversial topic of 'Privacy vs. Security'
ensued—we found it challenging to define
‘privacy’ and ‘security’ because the committee
realized immediately how subjective even the
basic premise of the debate was. Everyone was
well-researched and interested, sharing their
unique perspectives and insights in an effort to
come up with solutions to the case of Apple vs
US government court case after the San
Bernadino Shootings. The most challenging
aspect of the day was remaining on topic; the
delegates were so enthusiastic that they were
able to extend every issue raised, looking at all
aspects of the controversies. Due to time
constraints, we had to cut the discussion short
and continue with the even more enthralling
issue of ‘Terrorism’ which all delegates
seemed even more excited about. Definitely,
the most memorable part of the day were the
committee’s props! Our lightsaber, sword,
Nerf guns, nunchucks and handcuffs made the
rest of the conference jealous.
Page | 12
General Evaluation There was a general evaluation established during the conference, which gave us through the
process of general questions an outcome of the delegates’ beliefs:
The key to our future: How can we overcome the problems of life if we can’t ask questions to
get answers? One Chinese proverb says:
“He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes, but he who
does not ask is a fool forever.”
We asked the humans of RMC questions that relate to their topics and
we got some pretty interesting answers.
If someone told you that “Immigrants steal our jobs”, how would
you respond? Would you say, “Oh yeah, mate!” or re-enact the
trailer of “Captain America Civil War “? The answers were pretty
interesting.
Security: “Of course, the illegal
immigrants are stealing our jobs. The fact
that most blue collar jobs are done by
immigrants isn’t a difference to me.”
Organiser: “I disagree, it’s the employers’
problem, most Cypriots would not work
for anything below the minimum wage,
and most immigrants work in these
positions.”
Chair: “No, they are not. The Westphalian
system has worked so far, but migration is
natural and inevitable. Most countries have
been enhanced by migration.”
Economics: “I would say, do your
research and don’t be ignorant. People
tend to be self-conscious about their job
positions and blame ignorance on others.”
Page | 13
Technology is everywhere in our lives. Of course, with miracles
come challenges. In order to find out about those challenges, we
asked the following question. What’s the biggest technological
challenge that humanity will face in the next century?
Economics
“Robots, in twenty years’
time will do in one hour,
what 100 people do in ten
hours. People might face
difficulties in job
acquisition.”
Technology
“Sustainable energy. The
difficulties in producing
green, unlimited, cheap
and safe energy to all.
How does something like
thermonuclear energy
might be able to be used
universally?”
Organiser
“Artificial Intelligence,
because it will take up
lots of jobs, which will
lead to unemployment
and job changes, as well
as monitoring all these
changes.”
Pretty intriguing answers, don’t you say dear readers? Questions and answers
were very intriguing. The debates will surely be ten times as good.
What is the difference between Justice and Equality?
Equality
“Equality should not be justified; there
should be a natural correspondence of
people needs which will form a society’s
coherency opinion of opinions regardless
on the demands of law.”
Economics
“Justice is privilege, equality is subjective.
–Uganda justifies child labour since the
model of its country law principles agree
on the instrumentalisation of underage
people.”
Security
“The fact that Justice doesn’t depend on
equality, poses the primary insecurities of
each citizen. Internally speaking, due to
notions of discrimination-(that tends to be
a natural human reaction) - we tend to
maintain a barrier of the justification of
principles against what is ethically
correct.”
Meet the Media Team
From left to right: Orestis Leonidou, Phivos Philitas, Katerina Vyurkova, Eleni-Maria
Papachristodoulou, Sara Kallis (not photoshoped), Andreas Nicolaou (Editor), Nafsika
Hadjichristou, Marcos Shukuroglou, Christos Nicolaou