Jorge Ramos: “He Keeps the Pot Boiling” (revised in order to adjust the formatting.)
Throughout the years the definition of the public intellectual has not been clear. Academic scholars, society, professors, and public intellectuals themselves have all participated in trying to define what the public intellectual is; however, the debate continues. Therefore, before we begin any discussion of the public intellectual, we must first understand what the public intellectual is and what qualities allow an individual to qualify, and not qualify, as the public intellectual.
In
the article, “The Supposed Decline of the Public Intellectual”, the author Stephen Mack, a professor of Advanced Writing and
whom obtained a PhD at the University of Southern California, describes
Donatich’s notion of the declining
intellectuals in American culture as invalid. Donatich believes that the US’s
‘headstrong individualism and the myth of self-reliance” does not allow for
intellectualism to occur, and argues that society is like an infant that lacks
impulse control and therefore should be led by intellectuals and experts, who
like “all paternal intellectuals[,] have by birthright – impulse control”.
However on the other hand, Stephen Mack critiques Donatich’s idea of the public
intellectual as a impulse-controller and instead states:
So here’s the point: Any argument for the public intellectual that, like Donatich’s, rests the assumption that common citizens are forever childlike and must be led by a class of experts is politically corrosive and historically dangerous… It is wrong in the sense that it traffics in the self-serving fiction of American anti-intellectualism. And it is wrong-headed in the sense that it undermines the value of citizen responsibility by subordinating it unnecessarily to the most elitist argument for the public intellectual…
I agree. There should be
neither a form of domination of society by public intellectuals nor an
‘aristocracy of experts’, as Mack’s puts it. Instead, public intellectuals
should be serving the community with no self-interest and empowering the
public, not controlling them. Stephen states that we should not focus on who
the individual is, rather we must “shift from ‘categories and class’ to
‘function’”. If public intellectuals are simply concerned with the “health of
that class”, that of their own, then the function is not being served. As Jean
Ethke lsthaian points out, that’s exactly what the renowned Latino anchorman
for the largest Spanish-speaking media network in the US, journalist and writer
for The NYT Syndicate, Jorge Ramos has been remarkable for:
A public intellectual is not a paid publicist, not a spinner, not in the pocket of a narrowly defined purpose. It is, of course the temptation, another one, of the public intellectual to cozy up to that which he or she should be evaluating critically...
So the public intellectual needs, it seems to me, to puncture the myth-makers of any era, including his own, whether it's those who promise that utopia is just around the corner if we see the total victory of free markets worldwide, or communism worldwide or positive genetic enhancement worldwide, or mouse-maneuvering democracy worldwide, or any other run-amok enthusiasm. Public intellectuals, much of the time at least, should be party poopers.
Throughout
the years we have seen this behavior stimulate Jorge Ramos’s career, whom may
not be your usual public intellectual being that he is not a college professor
- as many immediately qualify as a public intellectual – however his
educational attainment, success in his journalism and news anchor career, and
his degree of advocacy all point to his qualification of a public intellectual.
His drive to create equality and his ability to look at both sides of the
spectrum has allowed him to gain a copious amount of support and validity from
society. Ramos’ interviews with some of the most important individuals in
American history, such as Obama, Bill Clinton, McCain, Mitt Romney, and more,
have proved his credibility as a reporter and his passion for his career as a
journalist and news anchor, who’s sole mission has been to inform society about
issues not only in the US but also around the world. For example, he has visited
Latin American countries, South Africa, Cuba, and done interviews with Hugo
Chavez, Fidel Castro, and Felipe Calderon.
Being
of dual-citizenship, Ramos was born in 1858 in Mexico City where he began his
journey by majoring in communication in the Universidad Iberoamericana. There
he was introduced to a journalism program and later became the producer and
writer of Noticiero de America Latina. Afterwards, he became an editor of
another news channel and held the duties of a news reporter. However, due to
censorship issues in the media, Ramos decided to leave Mexico and enter the US
with a student visa; showing his level of interest to inform the people and his
lack of desire to be controlled by the government.
Once
arrived to the US in 1983, he quickly continued his education and obtained a
masters degree in international relations. Later on he began his new journey in
the US, however with the same motives: to serve the people. In 1986 Jorge Ramos
commenced his job an as anchorman for Noticiero Univision 34, the #1
Spanish-speaking media network in the US. He currently also hosts Al Punto, a
political-based program where he interviews Republicans and Democrats about
contemporary issues.
His columns, news, and programs tend to all focus on the political realm, specifically that of immigration. As an immigrant, he has become heavily interested in the topic and became a citizen in 2008 as a way to become fully engaged in the US. Articles such as, “No Seas Neutral”, meaning “Don’t Be Neutral”, exemplifies his goals as a reporter stating that journalists “can and should use journalism as a weapon for a better purpose: social justice”. He mentions that his obligation as a journalist is to question any abusive power and to halt injustice; as well as be a reporter not a friend. Ramos believes that no matter if it is the president, a dictator, or anyone in power that you are going against, “the answer is very simple: I’m a reporter, I don’t want to be your friend”, like it or not.
In
various occasions he has proved that his obligation as a reporter has greater
importance than being a friend, or even an enemy. One of which has to do with
the recent houses that the president of Mexico, Enrique Pena Nieto, has bought
and has been accused of using government money to buy them; Ramos stated, “With what audacity can a
president ask Mexicans to fight corruption when he is not willing to do it himself
in his own house?”. Another president which he has supported, but also
confronted, has been Barack Obama. He had promised to pass a comprehensive
immigration reform, however as you can see this has not been accomplished and
the promise has been broken.
Ramos has written 10 books, some of which have been bestsellers. He has also received a number of awards, such as the “Mari Moors Cabot award from the University of Columbia, and has won 8 Emmy awards for excellence in journalism”, and the Distinguished Citizen Award, among many others.
In the book, “A Country for All; An Immigrant Manifesto”, for which he received the
Latino Book award, Ramos urges that there is a need for a comprehensive immigration reform that
legalizes 11 million undocumented immigrants, in addition to providing them a
path towards citizenship. With the use of statistical analysis he is able to
show how the flow of immigrants have been of help to America’s economy, and how
they will continue to bring about economic gains if legalized. He states that
enforcement in the border does not necessarily stop migration from occurring,
but only becomes expensive to the US and a continuing rise for fraud, coyotes,
and the black market. He also argues that deportation and self-deportation is a
terrible idea that does not solve the issue of undocumented immigration. This
might serve as a temporarily solution, but not for the long run. In addition,
he talks about the issue of education can be solved once an immigration reform,
that being the DREAM Act.
In an interview with The Colbert Report, Ramos advocates for a reform and stresses the idea that even when undocumented immigrants cross without papers there is a need for ‘co-responsibility’ in the side of both the US and immigrants, being that the US has a dependency on the cheap labor of undocumented immigrants which is what propels a circular migration of many immigrants.
I think all of these points to a persuasive comprehensive immigration reform that should have occurred a long time ago, but is unfortunately still in progress. I believe that if individuals are already in the US, why deport then? That would simply be a waste of human capital, especially with children that were born here and are basically American. I think that the US should pass a comprehensive immigration reform and also acknowledge the work that they for so many years have done for the better of the country.
Conclusively
I believe that Jorge Ramos is a public intellectual because through his years
of journalism and news anchor careers, he has been able to touch the hearts of
many due to his dedication and credibility to inform the public about contemporary
issues, specifically political ones as expressed in his show Al Punto. If he
did not wish to have a role as an advocate, being that Spanish media networks
are very concerned with advocacy in different subjects such as literacy, the
Dream Act, and immigration reforms, then he would have not taken up the role of
a journalist and a news anchor. If he wouldn’t express so much concern for the
public then he would not have the credibility nor opportunity to interview
individuals that are so important in America and other countries. Jorge Ramos
is the true definition of an individual who is able to continuously “keep the
pot boiling”.