The event I attended was called “Cultural Diplomacy and the Cold War” which took place on December 9th, 2021, at 4 pm. The speaker was a native of Bulgaria named Theodora Dragostinova  who has studied culture during the Cold War. Overall, I found the meeting a little underwhelming. I thought that it was interesting when the speaker touched on the role of women in Bulgaria, along with how Bulgaria impacted the world culturally, however I disliked this complete focus on Bulgaria. While I understand that this is the speaker’s specialty, I also think that it’s hard to understand Bulgaria’s position without the broader context of the Cold War. I also think that there was a lack of focus on the global outcome of Bulgaria’s diplomatic endeavors, instead focusing on Bulgaria itself and limitedly on various other small powers. Nevertheless, the speaker seemed prepared and passionate about the subject which I appreciated. I think that the meeting could be improved by giving a brief context on the Cold War and also giving more information about how Bulgaria affected the world on a global stage rather than in relatively minimal ways. The meeting was clearly connected to International Affairs due to the focus on Bulgarian diplomacy.

The event that I decided to go to was “Is the Two-State Solution Dead?” on September 23rd. This was a virtual meeting discussing the problems and hostility between Israel and Palestine. I found the content of the meeting interesting, as although I was aware of the tensions between these two states, I was oblivious to how much of a problem it has become. In my personal opinion, I think that the two state solution is inherently flawed and can only lead to hostility towards the other. I thought that the speaker, Peter Hahn, was interesting and knowledgeable, however I would have preferred an accompanying visual or presentation. Additionally, while I typically would not be bothered by the presence of non-students, many of the questions were raised by them and they seemed drawn out and opinionated. While I also have no problem with appropriate discourse, this forces the speaker to comment on an ultra-specific question, which may have only been wondered by the questioner. This also annoys me because it puts the spotlight on someone who is likely considerably less knowledgeable than the speaker, and allows them to present their opinion, accurate or not, as fact. While I think the speaker did a good job of handling these questions, and the host did well to cut off the especially drawn out questions, I would’ve preferred their absence. Nevertheless, I thought the meeting was overall informative and that information was well presented.

For my second event of the month, I attended the IA Service Spotlight: College Mentors for Kids. Since it was a short meeting, Steven told us to simply mention that we attended.

The first event that I went to this month was GeoGuessr with Amber. Although I had heard of GeoGuessr before this meeting I had never played it. I thought that the game was a lot of fun, it would put you in a random location and you would have to guess where you were. There were two modes we played, famous places and world, I liked the famous places mode better. I felt like when we were put in a random location anywhere in the world we had to guess most of the time, but famous places actually relied on knowledge of important sites. On the other hand, I felt that the world mode was better for International Affairs purposes. If I were to play more, I would probably focus on the world mode, as it’s cool to see different places around the world that you wouldn’t typically find in a textbook. During the event we primarily played as a group, which I thought was fun. It made it so that one person wasn’t put on the spot and it made figuring out the location much easier. Also, since there weren’t too many people in the meeting, we didn’t have to deal with people talking over each other. GeoGuessr was a great choice to play and I’m glad I attended this event.

The fourth meeting that I attended for International Affairs was Current Events Catch-Up on October 25th, 2020. I watched the recording of the first Current Event night and enjoyed it, so I decided to attend the second live. The meeting followed the same format as the first, starting with a Kahoot and then followed by covering different news topics individually. Once again Samantha Zimmerman hosted the meeting. Since I only watched the recording last time, this was my first time participating in the Kahoot. Unfortunately, I knew practically nothing about these topics going into the event, and I ended up finishing in a measly 22nd place. On the bright side, I thought that Samantha did another great job of presenting the information. Sufficed to say I knew a lot more about the topics covered after the meeting than before. The topic that I found the most interesting was the endangered Loa Frogs. I thought that it was pretty spectacular that the Loa Frog population increased so drastically so quickly, which is obviously great news for the preservation of their species. Nevertheless, their total population is incredibly small, and more work will need to be done in order to maintain their survival. I genuinely enjoyed another Current Event night, and I hope that a third is scheduled.

The third event that I attended for IA was Ohio Immigrants and Refugees: Lived Experiences and Mobilizing for change. This event took place on October 23rd, 2020. This event relates to International Affairs because Immigration and the intake of refugees relies on the relationships between countries. I thought that the meeting was informative. I liked how there were multiple speakers, it provided a good change of speed and was a good way to keep interest even though it was a longer meeting. As far as the content of the meeting goes, I thought that the topic was interesting. I was previously unaware of many of the immigration laws covered, so I learned a lot. One thing that caught my attention in particular was the news about DACA. I personally disagree with the changes that Trump made as I support less immigration restrictions. One of the things that makes the United States so great is our diversity, and this will obviously not contribute to that. This topic relates to my major of Economics because the economic situation of a country plays a large role in its ability to take in immigrants and refugees. If a country is prospering, it would likely be more willing to add to its population than if it were struggling. Overall the meeting was informational, and I enjoyed watching it.

September 28, 2020

The second event that I watched was Current Event Night. I was unable to watch the meeting live, so I watched the recording. The meeting took place on September 27th, and it was led by Samantha Zimmerman, a student at OSU and member of the International Affairs Scholars Program. The meeting was about various different stories about politics from around the world. The first story that Samantha shared was that France has increased their paternity leave time from two weeks to four weeks. My opinion on this is that France is taking a step in the right direction. I do not think that fathers are usually given enough time with their newborn, so this is a nice change. Another story I found interesting was about Australia’s recent economic recession. Much like Samantha, I am an Economics major, so this is directly to my studies. The recession was the first that Australia had in three decades, showing how much of an impact Covid-19 and climate change have had on the global economy. I found the meeting to be very educational, as I had not heard of any of these stories. I think that Samantha did a good job presenting the information which also made it worthwhile. The key takeaway that I had was that myself and other people should try to stay up to date on foreign affairs.

September 28, 2020

The first event I decided to go to was “Racism, Culture, and Health Equity: The Urgency of the Moment”. The meeting was led by Collins O. Airhihenbuwa, a professor at Georgia State. The main point that I took away from the meeting is that without changing our society on a global scale, racism will continue to hinder our prosperity. This relates to International affairs because in order to change society on a global scale, all countries and people must be involved.

One of the main points that Professor Airhihenbuwa made was that racism not only harms its victims, but it also hurts entire countries where it is very prominent. The way I see it, that makes perfect sense. If a society doesn’t allow an whole ethnic group to succeed, then they are not only losing production, but also the intellectual value that people in such groups can bring to the table. The other main point that Professor Airhihenbuwa made was that we have to take action in order to end structural racism. It is not something that can be simply fixed. Changing our society to accept people of other races and give them equal opportunity will take time, hard work, and money, but it is possible.