International Isolation

There seems to be two main schools of thought when it comes to policies of international isolation.

With various elections closing in around the world, the topic of immigration and isolation is once again up for debate. This is a major issue in the upcoming British election with the debate bringing into question the position of the United Kingdom within Europe and the wider world. The fear of immigration in this country seems to stem from a theory that the people of these islands are a 'pure' race of some sort that is losing their birth right of land to outside forces. Indeed, many people that are seemingly tolerant of immigration believe that they are doing a favour to people that arrive from other countries and that they owe a debt.

The United States of America highlights another perspective on isolation. A major turning point in the history of the United States of America undoubtedly came at the point that Roosevelt forced the country to enter the wider world. Ever since this time, citizens of the country and citizens of other countries have debated the actual effects that these policies have created. Indeed, to be elected president of the USA, a by-line relating to how the country will lead the world in some respect always plays well. But as this policies continued they seemed to have become far more self-interested. That is not to say that they are any more or less selfish than the initial decision to enter World War 2. The most prevalent world view is now that this country gets involved for their own benefit and no others. In this sense the USA is just as isolated as any anti-immigration leaning government.

In both of these cases, very rigid lines are drawn up in relation to isolation. It must be stressed that countless people in these countries do not follow these extremely simplified patterns. The important point is that their governments are frequently perceived to behave in this way. Unfortunately this has the effect of painting all citizens of the country with the same brush. This dehumanises countless people as I believe the main effect of isolationist policies is to undermine the common connection we all have.

To block people from entering a country or to offer help only when it helps a certain country is to emphasise man-made borders and to undermine real, border-less connections.

-The English Student

A Smaller World with Greater Distance

Terms like "The Global Village" get thrown around by IT experts these days but I must wonder if the world is becoming a smaller place.

In some respects the closing of distances in the world is very obvious. The internet has allowed people to make contact with others from every country in the world and at any time desired. Mobile phones have also allowed easy communication between every corner of the world. This coupled with the rise of "Web 2.0" and other media like Twitter equate to a very high level of access to information and other people.

But one thing that the IT revolution has not been able to replicate is the real nuances of human communication. These online methods can only really take second place next to actual contact. Of course, web cameras and microphones can simulate these interactions but no innovation has managed to bridge the physical gap caused by distance and time.

In fact, the tools of the "Global Village" actually increase the gap between people. When engaged in some kind of electronic communication with someone it is very easy to view the medium in contrast to physical contact. These media will always be compared to this physical contact and yet will never surpass it. Much like the advent of the telephone or fax, it is natural to assume that new methods of electronic communication will decrease the gap between people. While they do make certain forms of communication possible and certainly have huge advantages there is simply no replacement for physical contact with someone.

The absence of this contact has become more obvious and thus increased the distance between people.

-The English Student