#moralityinteens

“Higher education is a strategic investment in our nation’s future. Education should be a right, not a privilege. We need a revolution in the way that the United States funds higher education.” - Sen. Bernie Sanders at a rally by college students outside the U.S. Capitol on March 27 

As a university student, I find the topic of college tuition a particularly pressing issue in this presidential race. Although there is a lot to be said about the conflicting views from both sides, as I mentioned in my last post, I am inclined to focus on the Democratic candidates. Sanders and Clinton have approached this subject differently. Clinton states that public colleges and universities will be debt-free if students are willing to work at least 10 hours a week. In contrast, Sanders supports tuition-free college for all students, regardless of their socioeconomic status. During the CNN debate, he stated that he will “pay for [this] program through a tax on Wall Street speculation, which will not only make colleges and universities tuition-free, it will substantially lower college debt.”

Admittedly, I am not qualified to analyze how effective their policies would be in practice. Therefore, I am more interested in considering why these are the views they’re promoting. Yet again it seems as though Sanders is motivated predominantly by a sense of morality for future generations, stating that “education should be a right, not a privilege.” He is undeniably correct that a high school education is simply not enough anymore to be qualified and hired for high-paying jobs. Furthermore, tuition prices for many universities and colleges are absurdly high. However, if the money goes toward improving education, I think perhaps those who can afford it should have to pay a “reasonable” tuition. Nevertheless, I support the moral standpoint from which Sanders approaches this topic and many others. 

A study done by the University of Michigan shows that “college kids today are about 40 percent lower in empathy than their counterparts of 20 or 30 years ago”. It has been heard and said many times over that the current generation of teenagers and young adults are much more self-absorbed and narcissistic. Reasons for this could stem from the fact that technology has been such a prevalent part of our development. The ‘selfie generation’ and plethora of social media platforms available have promoted a culture that places emphasis on the promotion of the self. 

Having a large number of ‘friends’ on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. allows people to tune out others, and pick and choose when they want to listen and pay attention to others. Rather than face-to-face interactions that dominated much of communication 20 to 30 years ago, the use of screens has now become the main source of information sharing. This fact is a bit frightening considering the implications that this ‘screen’ culture has on the development of empathy on teens, especially when emotional intelligence has yet to fully develop. 

It is no surprise that within the technology immersive society that we live in, the moral development of teenagers has taken many hits. Over half of adolescents and teens have been bullied online, with over 1 in 3 adolescents experiencing cyberthreats. There is a general fear, that I myself harbor, that children who grow up with screens that provide endless entertainment and information will lose that vital face to face experiences with peers their age. It is the tear forming and bruise inducing incidents at school that teaches adolescents that name-calling and violent actions do in fact have serious consequences on their victims. The emotional implications of bullying are shrouded behind a bright screen. 

Our morals are highly dependent on our social interactions, and that platform has shifted from mostly face-to-face interactions to the internet, where empathy can very easily be blanketed. The desire to garner likes on Instagram and followers on Twitter can also partly account for the growth in narcissism among young adults. These actions may seem innocuous, but the growing self involvement involved in the lives of teenagers may have lasting affects on their moral development, as indifference can grow. What distinguishes narcissists from non-narcissists? Empathy. The ability to identify with others and experience life from another’s point of view. 

This is not to say that technology and the internet hasn’t done a lot to connect many people and share information, but there is a subtle, underlying damage that is being done to the overall moral development of its users. 

I’m really glad I found this video - as someone who is biracial I learned a lot. Most of the mixed race people I’ve met have expressed disgust at comments like “what are you?” or something about how being mixed race is exotic and cool, and rightfully so. I’ve even lost friendships in high school because I didn’t feel the same way as my mixed race peers, and I’m finally starting to understand why. Growing up in Korea people would constantly define my worth based on my appearance of being mixed race, because whiteness is considered beautiful all around the world. When I came to America, people weren’t so open about commenting on my racial background, so when I did get that rare complement, comment, or question about my race I would feel flattered. I relied so heavily my whole life on this being the most important, distinctive, special part of who I am, that I didn’t want to let that go - that I even welcomed fetishization and objectification of “biracialness” (for lack of a better word). Without it, I was simply afraid I would have nothing left. 

It’s clear to me now that this is a sign that my self-esteem needs a lot of work - that I need to start defining myself through things I actually have control over. Thank you for reminding me that I am worth more than my mixed race.