Principia Pilot » Opinion

Letter to the Editor

setorfelix — Mon, 07 May 2012 14:18:40 +0000

Dear editor,

I wanted to comment on the Letter to the Editor by Tim Dixon that appeared in the April edition of the Pilot.

Mr. Dixon says that the response of the college last spring to cases involving drug dealing and theft was “shocking” because the college “took a hard line with the wrongdoers and worked with local police.” He then goes on to discuss Principia’s rule-making, ending with the statement that “Principia MUST give up the notion that their rules define right and wrong. God tells us what is right and wrong and students can be trusted to make use of this line of communication.”

We should remember that the People of the State of Illinois, not Principia, have made the rules that say dealing in drugs and theft is wrong. Not only Principia, but society considers these to be serious offenses, and most colleges throughout the country would work with local police on cases involving these offenses.

Sincerely,
Colin Treworgy
Principia College ’74

Graduation:then and now

setorfelix — Mon, 07 May 2012 13:50:25 +0000

As a college senior, most of my conversations these days end up with questions about what I am going to do with the rest of my life. Generally, I try to subtly change the subject before anyone realizes I haven’t got a clue. So, in a conversation with my dad earlier this year, I attempted to avoid the inevitable subject of the future by asking him what it was like when he graduated from college. And let me tell you, we have it a lot easier than college graduates did in 1964.
The Vietnam War was beginning to escalate, and there weren’t many options for recent graduates. They could face the draft, enroll in officer candidate school, join the Peace Corps, or continue on in school. With the possibility of being drafted hanging over their heads, they didn’t have the luxury of taking time to simply follow their dreams. The decisions they made were based on a war, and a controversial one at that.
My dad wasn’t sure what he wanted to do, though he did know that he didn’t want to get involved in the conflict, especially one in which the chances for survival were not promising. For that reason, he and a couple of friends decided to apply for Naval officer candidate school. However, my dad eventually decided to go to graduate school. He applied for deferment with his draft board and then headed to California to attend UC Berkeley’s Business School.
While at school, the fear and uncertainty that permeated the nation was still present, and my dad began thinking about what step he would take once his two-year graduate program ended. So, he applied to enter the Peace Corps, which would allow him to extend his deferment. He was accepted to the Peace Corps in India, yet decided against going. He would explore another option.
When he finally did complete graduate school in 1966, he applied for Air Force officer candidate school and was accepted. But, before he began training for the Air Force, his Army draft number was called. He went to the draft board and ended up failing the physical because of a minor health problem. As a result, they put him on deferment. My dad then decided to go into the banking business to wait out the draft, but he was never called again.
While it worked out that my dad never had to be a part of the Vietnam War, it was something that still affected each one of his decisions. His options were limited, and it was sometimes unclear whether he was doing something because he wanted to or because he had to consider his options in light of the draft.
The climate of the nation was heavy with emotions and burdened by the war. The nation was divided, creating a hostile environment in many of the cities around the country.
Today, we have it so much better. For one thing, there is no longer a draft. People don’t have to live in fear of being ripped out of their everyday lives and sent to war. We have the ability to pursue more freely what we want. Whether that’s starting your own business, or going back to live with mom and dad for a while, we have options.
Some of you may even feel overwhelmed by the amount of choices you have. The thought of having limits might actually seem appealing. It can be pretty intimidating trying to determine what you want to do with your life when you have no idea where to start. But, at least you won’t be forced to be part of something you don’t believe in. And, isn’t better to have too many options than not enough? You don’t have to figure it all out right away. You have time to think it through.
So, to all my fellow soon-to-be graduates, no matter how daunting the future may seem, at least we have the freedom to make our own choices and follow our dreams. Remember that the next time you get frustrated with all the questions about the future. I know I will.

A country in anticipation

setorfelix — Fri, 04 May 2012 14:39:11 +0000

There are less than 100 days before the 2012 Olympics begin in London, and there is already great excitement in Britain about this once-in-a-lifetime experience. The ability to host this event has generated greater national awareness and unity. There is certainly no other event where such a varied and mixed group of athletes and fans come together for competition and entertainment.
The preparation for this Olympics has been very unusual for Britain because of the timeliness of construction at Olympic Park. In the past, construction on projects such as the London Eye, a Millennium project, and Wembley Stadium, the country’s national soccer stadium, finished long after the original deadlines. So it is a great relief to the Olympic organizers that this particular hurdle was cleared in time.
An important part of London 2012′s bid to host the Olympics was its emphasis on the legacy that would last many decades after the Games. In the eyes of many, this objective has already been met. The head of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), Jacques Roggue, said: “London has raised the bar on how to deliver a lasting legacy. We can already see tangible results in the remarkable regeneration of East London. This great historical city has created a legacy blueprint for future Games hosts.”
Roggue’s mention of East London is critical to the whole bid. During the bidding process, the London 2012 team promised that the Olympics would regenerate a part of London that at the time was very run down and poorly maintained. Since this time, the East End of London, particularly the Borough of Stratford, has been regenerated to house the Olympic Park and Village and several other state-of-the-art arenas.
Another promise in the London 2012 bidding process was to introduce more young people to sports and encourage more to play. The Independent reported that “efforts to boost the numbers of people taking part in sport have so far failed.” But the failure of efforts to increase athletic participation among young people must not entirely be blamed on the Olympic organizers. The global economic crisis has forced the British Government to make spending cuts, and Olympic funding has not been exempt. Funding cuts for legacy projects, in particular, have limited the amount of money Olympic organizers can spend on clubs and other initiatives that encourage young people to be active.
There are many skeptics of the Olympics, most of whom worry that the Olympics will benefit London only briefly. Others worry that because they live far away from London, they simply will not be able to be involved in, or feel the benefits of, the Olympics to the same degree as someone nearer the city. However, according to the BBC, many events will be held all across Britain. Sailing events will take place in Southwest England and football matches will be played all over the UK. London, then, is not the only place that will experience the benefits of the Olympic atmosphere.
London’s mayor, Tory Boris Johnson, has been instrumental in the promotion of the Olympics. Johnson has been one of the main public figures that have spread enthusiasm for the Olympics in London and abroad. Immediately after the last Olympics in Beijing, Johnson said “the Olympics will give that part of the East end of London [Stratford, where the Olympic Park is located] the huge regenerative boost that it needs.” This sentiment explains the long-term effect Olympic organizers hope the Games will instigate.
For many, the coming Olympic Games represent a light in dark times. The War on Terror and the global financial crisis help explain the world’s fervent anticipation of this Olympics. This is just the type of event that enables a country to unite, especially such a multicultural one as Britain.

By the numbers: U.S. national debt

setorfelix — Fri, 04 May 2012 14:36:45 +0000

America’s total debt is currently $15,600,000,000,000 (trillion) – Total debt (approximate)

Here are a few more numbers to put that figure into perspective:

29,700 BC – One trillion seconds ago

590,551 – Number of seasons Albert Pujols would have to play under his current contract ($25.4 million a year) in order to earn $15 trillion

$10.6 trillion – Total federal debt at the beginning of Obama’s Presidency

October 15, 2012 – Date on which we will hit the current “debt ceiling” of $16.4 trillion

69.4% – Debt as percentage of GDP today

344% – Debt as percentage of GDP in 2050

4.06% – Percentage of GDP spent on the military (ranking us behind such juggernauts as Brunei, the Maldives, and Eritrea)

10.3% – Percentage of GDP spent on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid in 2010

18.2% – Percentage of GDP projected to be spent on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid by 2050

2/3 – Proportion of federal spending devoted to mandatory spending (entitlements, pensions, et al.)

16 – Years we have left before mandatory spending consumes the entire federal budget (leaving nothing for important things like defense)

Anyone with an elementary understanding of accounting (or a calculator) can plainly see that we are spending ourselves into oblivion. As many people have pointed out before me, and as many will assuredly point out after me, these spending habits can’t continue. But that’s not the only reason this is a pressing issue. What is important is that we are continuing to dig ourselves deeper and deeper into the financial hole with no foreseeable end in sight. Which leads us to the last (and possibly most important) number…

2 – Vital steps we need to take to get us off the road to ruin.

Step one: Fix entitlements. A good place to start would be to consign the abomination that is Obamacare to “the ash heap of history” (in the words of Ronald Reagan). Aside from coercing people into purchasing a product from a private company and giving Congress the potential for virtually unchecked power to micromanage our lives, Obamacare will add an additional $17 trillion in obligations to our tab, on top of the debt itself. And that’s a fairly conservative estimate, using the Obama administration’s own numbers. Realistically, the cost will most likely be much, much higher. Even if the Supreme Court doesn’t declare the law unconstitutional (unlikely, given the thrashing the law was given during oral arguments), it should be repealed before it piles even more debt on the backs of the American youth. (We, after all, are the ones who will end up paying for these years of profligacy, in one form or another.)
Step two: “Vote the bums out,” as the saying goes. The election of 2012 will be about far more than Barack Obama versus Mitt Romney. It will be more than a battle between Democrats and Republicans. It will be an ugly, bare-knuckled, no-holds-barred brawl between two diametrically opposed visions for the future.

We have seen the Left howl in outrage at the unveiling of Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) new budget proposal, though relatively modest in its reforms. The Democrats in Washington have shown that they will oppose on instinct anything that threatens to come close to significantly reducing an entitlement benefit. (Whether this is due to shortsightedness, cowardice in the face of an unpopular decision, or a case of drastically misplaced priorities is open for debate, though I am inclined to give the benefit of the doubt and suggest the third option.)
Conservatives offer an alternative vision: one in which the government is not an intrusion on everyday life, and like the rest of us, lives within its means, or at least is on the path to doing so. Conservatives recognize that there will be difficult decisions that must be made in order to return our government to a sustainable path, and that the consequences for failing to do so are far worse than the political ramifications of the unpopular but necessary steps that must be taken to save us.
And while conservatives don’t have all the answers, at least they don’t vehemently and reflexively object to the very mention of cutting spending at all, as sometimes occurs, and as was exemplified by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) when a proposal to cut federal funding for a cowboy-poetry festival came up not long ago. If a group of lyrically-inclined cowpokes (not a particularly large constituency, one would think) can arouse such defensiveness in the spend-happy Democrats, imagine the rhetorical carnage that will have to take place to get entitlements on track. (The attack ad portraying a Paul Ryan look-alike shoving a wheelchair-bound granny off a cliff should give you some idea.)
The Obama administration and its cronies will fight tooth and nail for the right to keep up irresponsible spending, and the socialist-style wealth redistribution and shared misery that go with it, on all of us. It is absolutely imperative that they be stopped. With the above numbers in mind, dear readers, you ought now to understand exactly why.

Luxury from a lofty “Vantage” point

setorfelix — Fri, 04 May 2012 14:27:21 +0000

A few months ago, I met a man named Mike Roy who’s certainly as interested in cars as anyone I’ve ever met. After we had talked for a while, he told me that he owned a 2008 Aston Martin Vantage. He offered me the chance to test it and write about the experience. Given the nature of the car, it’s hard not to make a cliché James Bond reference, but I’ll try to refrain.
As the day of the test drive loomed nearer, so did forecasts of rain – not ideal conditions for driving or photographing such a fantastic car, but we lucked out, the sun appearing just ten minutes before I arrived at Mike’s house. As I pulled in, I spotted the sinister, muscular Vantage in the driveway, with just the slightest dusting of Maine’s rampant pollen on the glossy black paint. Mike showed me and my photographer around the car, then he handed me the keys.
I’ve tested plenty of fast cars, but fast alone isn’t enough for most drivers to be happy. Unless you’re a stoic, you’ll want comfort, practicality, and good looks, along with a long list of smaller (but still important) attributes. Let’s see how the Aston Martin Vantage covers the spectrum.
Firing up the Vantage feels exactly as it should. Insert and twist the key in the ignition, then press the etched crystal start button in the middle of the dash. The 4.3 liter hand-built V8 thunders into life, then settles down into a throaty, slightly pulsating burble. Though 4.3 liters is relatively small in the sports car world, Aston Martin massaged their V8 to make an impressive 380 horsepower and 302 lb-ft. of torque, so there’s a wave of power ready whenever you summon it. Of course, you’ll be lucky if you manage twenty miles per gallon, but this car isn’t all about fuel economy, and it’s certainly not the least efficient ride out there. The six-speed manual transmission is firm and precise, with short throws and a surprisingly forgiving and light clutch.

The sleek curves of the Aston Martin Vantage are sure to draw many stares. photo courtesy of Stephen Purcell

Performance-oriented cars often have stiff, unforgiving suspensions to help them handle better, and most Maine roads are frequently mangled by weather changes. These conditions are better suited to giving violent shiatsu massages than good road holding, but the Vantage soaks up all but the largest craters with impressive composure. To keep you from sliding around as the car hugs the road, the hand-stitched seats are firmly bolstered, but still quite comfortable. Sitting low in the driver’s seat makes putting your elbow on the windowsill an over-your-head affair, but that’s fine, because this isn’t the kind of car that demands just a little attention. Sure, it’s relatively easy to drive given its power and prestige, but the steering and brakes are quick (especially the dual caliper rear discs), and treating the controls like those of a lesser vehicle will likely get you rear-ended or veering off of the road at an alarming rate.
Looking out over the expansive, sculpted hood is necessary when driving, but if the Vantage is at a standstill, it’s the gorgeous interior that merits attention. As exquisite as the outside of the car is, the inside makes you feel just as spoiled and important. Swathed in light tan leather with black stitched accents, you’ll become keenly aware of all of the subtle amenities this car has to offer. The gauges are framed in a brushed light metal that is likely aluminum, and lit by a bluish light that bathes the dials. The center console is neatly arranged with a hidden navigation system that can swivel out toward the top. The elegant crystal start button leads into a metallic grey series of buttons that are accented by glossy silver climate control knobs toward the bottom. Of course, most of the interior is covered or accented by the aforementioned leather and stitching, ensuring that the car exudes class inside and out.
Words and even pictures struggle to do the Aston Martin Vantage justice, as it is arguably one of the most beautiful cars in the world. Whether parked or driving, you’re guaranteed to have onlookers gawking and twisting their necks for a better look. Another ad“Vantage” of the car’s styling is that the remarkably flowing and chiseled body will age very well, as curves generally have an advantage over angular designs in older cars. This helps ensure that the Vantage will become a timeless classic, and will always be aesthetically appealing.
The Aston Martin Vantage, now sold as a 2012 model year, has seen a few major updates in the past few years, most notably a larger 4.7 liter V8 that puts out 420 horsepower and 346 lb-ft. of torque. Though fast, the Vantage isn’t built primarily for speed. It’s just as much about “soul” and “passion,” although those terms might be overused. Still, it seems okay to use them when referencing a car that looks this stellar. You can get a Nissan GT-R for less money and it will go faster, but you won’t likely feel as connected to the experience, because there are so many computers in the GT-R. And though it’s striking, the GT-R won’t draw eyes like the Vantage does.
So, what is the Vantage? It’s a stunning all-around car for one or two people. It can carry a decent amount of luggage in the trunk, it looks incredible inside and out, and it performs as well as you’ll ever need on public roads. It’s also an investment in a high-class name brand, as well as a dive into relative exclusivity. The Aston Martin Vantage is a finely polished jewel that will retain its shine for decades to come, and will provide its owners with massive smiles, whether the Vantage is parked in the driveway or carving up a canyon road. This car shows you’ve made it.

Image courtesy of

Tips to stretch a graduate’s budget

setorfelix — Fri, 04 May 2012 14:23:02 +0000

Why are you in college? Probably because someone told you somewhere down the line that it would be a good idea. In fact, several people probably told you the same thing several times. Those people were probably right. College offers a chance to get out on your own before actually having to face the real world. It also gives you a chance at a better career and the chance to make more money down the line.
But for a lot of college graduates, disposable income doesn’t come until a few years after graduation. Grads face countless nights of eating ramen over the sink while visions of filet mignon dance in their heads. Fortunately, there are a few ways to stretch every dollar to the fullest so you still have money to take your boo out on the town after you’ve bought groceries for the week. The tips I’m going to share can also be implemented as part of a more sustainable lifestyle.

This food reasonable priced, but the packaging can have unseen ecological costs. photo / Andrew Briggs

Tip #1: Plant a garden. Gardens are a great way to access fresh produce without having to spend an inordinate amount of money. It’s easy to make a home garden organic, and having fresh food at home will also save you gas money. Home gardens also reduce strain on natural resources. Just think of all the water, fertilizer, pesticides, fuel, plastic, and manpower required to grow, package, distribute, and sell produce. If you want to learn how to garden, there are countless books and videos on the subject. Whether you own a large plot of land or if you can hardly see a spot of green from your apartment window, there’s a way to make any space work. If you end up living in a city, you’ll obviously have to get a bit more creative with your space. Community gardens exist, but the waiting list for these spaces is usually pretty long and it could be years before you get a plot. It might be better to plant window boxes in whatever space you have available. Books on permaculture can help you get the most out of a small space using simple, organic methods. This kind of project also allows you to reach out to neighbors and find someone with a green thumb to help you.
Tip #2: Avoid packaged foods. This may seem like an obvious one, but the more processed a food is, the less nutritional value it has. And while Twinkies may seem cheaper than a bunch of carrots, it’s only because the government gives billions of dollars to Big Agribusiness to make it that way. Much of the processed food you eat utilizes agricultural processes that exploit farmers, guzzle up natural resources, and strip the land of its natural ability to grow food. When you buy packaged food, you pay for the convenience of it. That extra packaging ends up in a landfill. In the long run, it’s better to spend a few extra minutes putting together a sandwich than it is to let the packaging from a Smuckers Uncrustable sit in a landfill for thousands of years.

Sophomore Nathan Boyer-Rechlin cashes in his check in his check at Principia College Bookstore, which will help him meet the need of college life. photo / Andrew Briggs

Tip #3: Buy in bulk. This is a solution to Tip #2. It’s a simple truth that the more food you buy at once, the cheaper it is going to be in the long run. Buying packets of oatmeal is more expensive than buying a two pound tub, which is still more expensive than buying a 50 pound sack. Bulk grains and dried beans last a very long time in storage, and end up costing cents per pound. Bulk bins can be found at any Coop or natural food store. In Eat Well on a Dollar a Day, Bill Kaysing advocates buying grain at feed lots. Yes, this is the same food livestock eat, but when you consider how much a racehorse is insured for and that a horse’s stomach is more temperamental than a human’s, it quickly becomes apparent that these bulk grains are perfectly safe for human consumption. If you still find this idea unsettling, most local natural food stores will offer to put you on their order list if you know what you want. You can special-order anything from a case of tofu to a 50-pound bag of grain. If you don’t want to buy that much food at once, an employee may be able to put you in touch with someone in your area willing to split an item with you.
Tip #4: Kick the meat habit, or give it up a few days a week. Meat costs a lot of money. Beans and tofu cost less. If you know where to buy it, you can get organic tofu at two dollars a pound. On sale, non-organic boneless chicken is around the same price. However, tofu yields around seven servings per pound, and chicken only three or four. Beans cost less than tofu, while fish and beef usually cost more than chicken. The production of meat also leads to topsoil erosion and the wasteful use of fresh water and feed. Both animals and workers are treated terribly on industrial farms. Annually, meat production gives off significantly more greenhouse gas than all the world’s transportation (Livestock’s Long Shadow, 2006). Factor in the environmental costs, and it’s clear that eating less meat can’t be a bad thing.
While these four tips will get you started, it certainly isn’t an exhaustive list of all you can do to stretch your dollar and live a more sustainable lifestyle.
As a student of creative writing, I am 99 percent positive I won’t be making a living from writing fiction, not unless I am cursed with unleashing the next Twilight on the world. The job I see myself graduating into offers 20 grand a year. For those of you who will share my modest future lifestyle, I entreat you to use each dollar to its fullest.

Images courtesy of

A song for the blank generation

setorfelix — Fri, 04 May 2012 14:01:32 +0000

Cue Donna Lewis’ “I Love You Always Forever.”
Okay. So it’s a song you won’t know till you hear the chorus. And once you hear it, you’ll wish you hadn’t. The entirety of your afternoon will now be spent repeating the title of said song and the embellishments that come with it. I don’t love this song, but every time I hear it, I can see a series of stills from my college years. This is not because this song explains these moments.

photo / images2.fanpop.com

This just happens to be the kind of song oft used toward the end of senior slideshows and romantic comedies based in high school. This song is for the determining moments. These characters, these friends “love you, always forever/near and far, closer together” etc., etc. Isn’t that awesome and intoxicating? Yeah, but it isn’t real. Whoever Lewis is singing to is most likely dodging her calls and talking to their attorney about a restraining order. It’s like “Every Step You Take.” Sting just sounds like a stalker. So why does it make me think of graduating?

photo / fuscia.cl

At the last pep rally I ever attended (they were mandatory in high school, don’t judge, go tigers…), the seniors were honored with clapping and Eve 6’s “Here’s to the Night” played on repeat. It played four times and it wasn’t weird. It should have been, I mean, this song came out eight years before I graduated. A sappy song by Bright Eyes or Death Cab would have made more sense for a 2008 graduate than a nod to the American Pie generation. Maybe it wasn’t weird because of movies like those that made it feel normal.

photo / tl.gstatic.com

We were the kids who grew up expecting graduation to be summed up by movies made for our older siblings. She’s All That and 10 Things I Hate About You explained our experience even though Mean Girls probably should have. Or maybe it’s just me. Playing songs that repeat “don’t let me let you go” remind me of every John Hughes movie ever made. In Pretty in Pink, the prom scene has the OMD song “If You Leave.” In The Breakfast Club, Judd Nelson walks across the football field, fist in the air, to Simple Minds “Don’t You Forget About Me.” It’s all the same thing, mediocre to bad song summing up the entirety of all that was the last four years of our lives, blah, blah, blah. But this is all high school. Where’s the collegiate song that ties all the loose ends together?

photo / beatsperminute.com

Spoilers: I have no idea and I don’t think I should be the one to decide. The song that encompasses college should be a song that almost everyone can tolerate. The in-reform music snob cannot be responsible for this, the final song. It would be too easy to pick something that would make an exclusive group out of me and my small, but mighty group of friends. This kind of elitism isn’t what the graduation song is about. John Hughes would kick my ass for being a jerk and he would be justified. The graduation song is meant to unite individuals on the grand scale. Maybe if we were at a different school I could quote Asher Roth’s “I Love College” and be done with it. It would make all our lives easier.

photo / blogspot.com

So what are we left with? The top song of the week is “Somebody that I Used to Know” by Gotye (feat Kimbra), not to be confused with the Elliott Smith song, although Gotye is playing on the same theme and similar chorus. This Gotye hit is the opposite of the graduation song. The tune is about the singer being left behind and having little more than memories of almost love and lots of hurt. This is not waxing poetic about always loving forever or not letting one let the other go. This song is about the void we’re left with when they, whoever they are, leave. Perhaps this is the perfect song for graduating college. I am assuming most of us have left a lot of the idealism of high school behind. We don’t talk to all our BFFs as often as we planned to and they just don’t comment on our walls as they once did. They stopped poking us ages ago. Maybe we are becoming extremely aware that our college friends are going the way of our high school ones, they’re just somebody that we used to know.

Too dark? Maybe this English major is just an over-reading cynic who is having a hard time believing the promises made by John Hughes and the American Pie soundtracks. God forbid, right? But this cynicism isn’t satisfying. If that Gotye song represented my future I can’t say that I would be enthused to live another day and that’s not just because I find the song annoying. I want something upbeat to get me through graduation and the next stills of my life. I want Wreckless Eric’s “Whole Wide World” without the obsession with finding a mate. I want a longer Neutral Milk Hotel’s “King of Carrot Flowers Part 1” and a less sad but just as beautiful Sufjan Stevens song. But, as I said originally, the graduation song should be universal. Maybe that’s impossible out of the simulacrum of a blockbuster movie. Maybe I am unsatisfied that I can’t have one song reach every member of this year’s senior class. It was probably stupid to try. With my luck, the best fit would be the most depressing one, Skrillex. In this case, universality is certainly overrated.

photo / chartstats.com

At this point, I suggest you pick your own graduation song. Make a playlist that consists of the worst and perfect moments. Make it too sappy for words or so tragic that you have to skip the third song in order not to cry. Or make it mediocre. When you find yourself lost or directionless, wait till the next grad movie to come out. They’ll give you something to work with. And me? I’ll just cue some eighties nod like The The’s “This is the Day” and fade out.

Images courtesy of

Racism and Principia

setorfelix — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 22:07:05 +0000

While there are many theories that have been put out to explain the origin of racism, none of them have provided a substantive or conclusive enough explanation. Racism advances the argument that characteristics and abilities are based on skin color, and that some racial groups are superior to others. However, modern science has ruled out the role of skin color and physical attributes and its relations to capability of individuals. These discoveries confirm that racial classification is only skin deep, and that human beings belong to one human race. Moreover, scientists have discovered that people of different “racial groups” can share more in common in terms of genetic composition than the people of the same racial groups. Modern science has eliminated the significance of race in our understanding of society and people. Despite the concept of race being a social construction, the power behind it cannot be underestimated.
The effect of historical racism is palpable. Globally, racism was the overriding reason for the spread of European civilization, slavery, and the colonization of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In Africa, racism was the reason behind 60 years of conflict between black southern Sudanese and the Arabic north. The Tutsi and Hutu conflict in Rwanda that led to the death of one million people is yet another significant consequence of racism. Belgium’s treatment of Tutsi as runaway Caucasians ignited much resentment from the Hutu majority. With the combination of discriminative politics and income inequality, a perfect recipe for conflict was bred. In South Africa, racism was institutionalized in the form of apartheid. Racial segregation became a state policy in South Africa. Even though the African Bantus constituted 70 percent of the population, they had no representation in parliament and were treated as second-class citizens in their own county. South Africans lived in this arrangement until 1994. In the settler colonies of Australia, North America, and New Zealand, racism led to the extermination of millions of the native people. The US provided limited rights to African Americans until 1960s even though they boasted of a constitution premised on freedom and equality.
Granted, the subject of racism is a sensitive one. For this reason, some people feel uncomfortable talking about racial issues. Nonetheless, in order to completely wipe out racism, there is a need for increased dialogue and consciousness. While it is easy to hold on to grudges and to blame each other, it is difficult for the world to progress under a racially charged environment. If the world is to realize a better future, the citizens of the world have to embrace the reality of a multiracial world. Focus should be placed on corrective measures as opposed to victimization and blame. Where necessary, there should be state engineered support systems aimed at correcting historical injustices. To bring home the discourse on racism, I will use Principia College as a case study.
Even though Principia College is a small society compared to American society at large, it provides a platform from which we can discuss racial issues. As a small college cohort with Christian Scientists, Principia College has been an example of racial harmony and societal equality. With over twenty percent of the student body being international students, Principia College can boast of being a small United Nations. Many cultures are represented at the College. Our Speaker series program brings speakers from around the world to our campus, helping our community members view the world as a global village. While this could be a big achievement for a small college like Principia, our journey toward racial harmony is not over. This journey has not been a rosy one. Before the 1960s, Principia College was only a white man’s world. Sociology professor Billy Miller is the only black professor at the college and was the first black student at Principia. The following years witnessed an increase in the number of blacks and minorities on campus. By 2008, almost 15 percent of Principia students were black. Interestingly, 95 percent of the black students were from Africa. One can only guess why African American students have shied away from enrolling at Principia.
First, Christian Science as a religion is based on high levels of reading and comprehension. Historically, African Americans have been denied access to education for political and social reasons. Without effective education, the connection with the books is lost. So is the love for reading. A religion that is heavily based on constant study and reading would therefore not be so appealing to an uneducated African American. In contrast, African students populate Principia College because of the African culture’s strong emphasis on education. For many Africans, education is the way out of poverty. Families and community put great value on the education of a child as a means of upward social mobility. The generous financial aid offered by Principia College makes it affordable for African students to acquire an education at the college.
Second, African Americans might be few at Principia College because of the school’s location. The African American population is mostly urban. Many live in the cities and in neighborhoods surrounding the city. A school situated in the middle of nowhere (almost one hour from the city) limits its access to the urban African Americans. If Principia was located in the city of St. Louis, maybe there would be more African American students attending. For Africans, the location of the school does not matter as much. Again, state bureaucracy upon arriving in the United States regarding visa issues and school transfers make it difficult to transfer from one school to another. Coupled with the African society’s perception of a US education as a sign of success, African students opt to stay in Principia.
Even with the vibrant presence of African students at the college, Principia has not escaped the curse of racism. While incidences of racism are few and subtle compared to other colleges, the very fact that they happen at the college illustrates that the college is not immune to racism. One aspect of racism that occurs a lot at the college is subconscious racism. For example, looking at the list of speakers that come from Africa, one can almost see a trend that the speakers were either victims of violence and war, or are advocates for such issues. While these are critical issues in Africa, it does not help to have only one image of a place depicted every time. The image of Africa presented by the speakers is that of a violent and unstable continent. From Rose Mapendo (Congolese genocide survivor) to Emmanuel Jal (former child soldier), to Betty Bugombe (peace mediator in northern Uganda), all recent speakers have been victims of violence and war. To an outsider, the message is clear: Africa is full of conflict! There are so many potential speakers that could tell stories of victories for Africa, such as athletes, politicians, artists, scholars, and more. I cannot deny the good intentions of the panel selecting the speakers. However, a critical analysis of the speaker series will reveal a subconscious thought of Africa as a continent prone to war and turmoil .
Racism also manifests itself in the Dining Room at Principia College. Any visitor at the college would be quick to notice the level of segregation at the dining table. Most of the time black students sit together, Latino students sit together, and white students sit together, usually separated into separate sections of the Dining Room. It would be easy to assume that black students speak one language and therefore they are inclined to sit together so that they can speak their language. This argument is invalid for two reasons. For one, African American students have joined the African table. This means that the language spoken at the table must be English. African-American students would not continually sit at a table where only foreign languages are spoken. Secondly, Africans do not speak one language. While it is true that the majority of international students from Africa are Kenyans, and Kenyans speak Swahili, it is not true that they will speak Swahili at a table where Ghanaians and Zambians are present. The common language here would be English.
What is happening at Principia College is not an outright form of racial prejudice or racism. Rather, it is the result of strong ethnic identity coupled with color consciousness. Students are treated with the same rules and given the same opportunities. However, the same students intentionally choose to segregate themselves along racial lines. There is little that the school can do to change this. This is a matter of personal choice. As long as no one is hurt, there is no problem. What Principia can do is incorporate an encompassing understanding of different cultures, particularly Africa. I think this will do a great deal in challenging the stereotype that Africa is a negative place and that nothing good except music comes out of it.

Sincerely,

Ubba Kodero

Western Journalists’ peril in Syria

setorfelix — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 19:59:38 +0000

Syria’s uprising against the current regime of President Bashar Al-Assad has been bloody and has received worldwide attention for the disturbing scenes we see on our TV screens. The images of bloodshed are horrendous, but how many people consider the risk those who are exposed to this kind of abuse actually take? Journalists – whether in the newspaper business or on television, risk their lives to bring the truth forward. Many face great danger, especially in the city of Homs, where violence has been most dire.
In recent weeks, two Western journalists have been killed: American Marie Colvin, who was a columnist for the British newspaper The Sunday Times and French photographer Remi Ochlik. The pair were killed by a missile attack that destroyed the building Colvin and Ochlik were inside.
The attack also injured French journalist Edith Bouvier and British photographer Paul Conroy, both of whom were employed by The Sunday Times. Bouvier and Conroy were stuck following the incident. According to the BBC, both have since been smuggled out of the country into neighboring Lebanon. Conroy, who worked with Colvin, has received substantial support from the UK. His wife called for his rescue and asked that the British government “forget the protocol” concerning their involvement in Syria. Initially, the British government responded “absolutely categoric[ally]” that a rescue operation for her husband was not possible. British pop singer Joss Stone, who is a close friend of Conroy, commented to the BBC that “if [Conroy] does not go out [to Syria] the story is not told, then the massacre would be worse. [Journalists] are saving lives just by being there.” Due to the nature of Colvin and Ochlik’s deaths, we must realize what journalists are risking to report back to the relatively complacent and comfortable Western World.
Stone added that despite “speaking from a selfish point of view [she] wants [her] best mate to talk to.” She added that Conroy is reporting from Syria “for a bigger, better, braver reason than what people realize. These stories have to be told.” Stone echoes what many in the journalistic field are doing by reporting such dangerous anti-tourist locations.
When asked in a 60 Minutes interview why journalists risk their lives in dangerous spots, Lara Logan, the CBS reporter sexually assaulted in Cairo last year, explained that “…they do it because they believe in being journalists.” This is a very important point when understanding a journalist’s drive in putting his or her life on the line, like Marie Colvin and Remi Ochlik did. There is sense of duty involved; a journalist has to report back when he or she witnesses something like the Syrian conflict firsthand.
In effect, what both Stone and Logan say is that journalists know the dangers involved in reporting from war-torn parts of the world; therefore, should governments be prepared to risk protocol to protect those that report from war zones, fully aware of the possible consequences?
The examples of Colvin and Ochlik bring home the realities of reporting abroad, despite the glamorous nature that is often associated with becoming a foreign correspondent. This trend of reporters becoming the subject of tragic news has made the world more aware of the violence and bloodshed taking place in Syria, but it also brings the feeling of loss to our own shores. Whatever the repercussions of this unhappy trend, it is sadly not the biggest tragedy the Syrian people have seen in recent months, a time in which many have lost their lives standing up to a government they no longer believe in. There are other journalists that have been and others that likely will be affected by this and other conflicts. But for the sake of good journalism, this sort of incident never has and never will prevent reporters from going out and reporting on world events, no matter where the danger might be.

One conservative’s view of Europe

setorfelix — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 19:57:40 +0000

In the previous issue of the Pilot, we heard from my esteemed colleague Oliver Simpson, who presented a European perspective on this year’s bunch of GOP presidential candidates. But how, you may be asking yourselves, do American conservatives view Europe?
The short answer: None too favorably, though there is still some (faint) hope.
The long answer: Europe is seen by American conservatives (as well as some British conservatives, most notably Daniel Hannan, an English member of the European Parliament) as a harbinger. Europe, with its fiscal nightmare driven by a half-century of extravagant welfare-state spending, is representative of the road we were put on by Wilson, FDR, and LBJ, and the road from which President Obama refuses to deviate.
As Mr. Hannan phrased it in his speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, D.C. in February, “I am living in your future, or at least the future towards which your present leaders seem intent on taking you. And believe me, my friends, you are not going to enjoy it.” Judging by the state of things across the pond, from issues such as rioting in Greece over the austerity measures, to the constant bailouts of Greece by the rest of the Eurozone that lead to – you guessed it – more bailouts, and what some see as the coming implosion of the Euro, it doesn’t look all that fun from where we’re standing.
A portion of this comes from the American Right’s healthy skepticism of intergovernmental organizations like the European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN). While the UN issue isn’t as relevant to this case, the EU’s example is very illustrative. In its desperate attempts to halt the financial implosion, it has taken some drastic measures. The decisions have resulted in a concentration of power in Brussels (home to the European Parliament) at the expense of the supposedly sovereign member-states.
Among the most nefarious of these centralization efforts are the replacements of two democratically-elected heads of government, George Papandreou of Greece and Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, by unelected Eurocrats sent in from Brussels. Did the EU remove them directly? No, but the immense political pressure coming from Brussels (and Berlin) left them no other choice. To an American conservative like me who takes sovereignty and democracy very, very seriously, the removal of a democratically-elected Prime Minister (even one with Berlusconi’s colorful nature) is despicable.
Opposition to the EU hasn’t been solely a province of Americans looking over at Europe, either. The European Union’s Constitution itself is a useful example. Again from Mr. Hannan’s CPAC speech, “[The European Constitution] was rejected repeatedly in referendums by 53 percent of Irish people, by 62 percent of Dutch people, by 54 percent of French people, and then it was imposed anyway.” To any objective observer, this has all the trappings of a regime with little regard for democracy or the will of the people. Is that worth bashing? Yes, I heartily believe so.
Is there still hope? Is America doomed to a European-style collapse? The answer hinges on this fall’s presidential election. If Barack Obama is re-elected, then the answer is, “Most likely.” The welfare state will continue to grow, the debt will continue to skyrocket, unemployment will remain high as the administration kills jobs to sate the bloodthirst of his environmental base, the abomination that is Obamacare will become a fact of life.
That does not mean that the election of whichever Republican emerges from the scrum that is the primary season will be a panacea. There is still much work to be done. The debt alone is reaching an insurmountable level. If our massive entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid) aren’t reformed quickly, they will eat up the federal government’s entire income by 2049. That doesn’t even account for the 70-odd other entitlement programs the government currently runs, much less other important things like, say, our national defense.
But take heart: We probably won’t get that far. As Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) recently informed the perennially clueless, tax-evading Secretary of the Treasury, Tim Geithner, the whole system will shut down in 2027 due to the financial strain that Obamanomics is putting on the American economy.
But back to the Europe issue. Are American conservatives skeptical of Europe? Are we desperate to turn our country around before we go down that same road to ruin? Yes, and for darned good reason. We have seen the future, and we don’t like it.