2015 spring issue ii by Campus BluePrint

CAMPUS 5

MAY 201

e? r u t u F e h ring rt o f s t rrymande e n G e n w o m D Breaking Move g GDP •

erin Reconsid • r u o h / for $15 The Fight

CONTENTS FROM THE EDITOR

“WE DESERVE MORE’

QUESTIONING THE GDP FRAMEWORK

Dear Readers, HAPPY ALMOST-END-OF-YEAR. And to my fellow seniors, happy-almost-graduation. My parting advice to you is practice wasting as little time as possible: go to class more, read more (including this astounding issue you’re holding), try new things, go out more often. You always have the power to change your situation. It’s truly been a pleasure. My only regret is not being able to spread my writers’ stories further.

SAYING GOODBYE TO UNC’S POVERTY CENTER

The Politics of Gerrymandering Netanyahu’s Victory Movement Towards $15/Hour The Limits to GDP

4 6 8 11

Take on Your Anxiety Keystone Pipeline Activism at the Oscars The End of the Poverty Center

14 17 18 20

STAFF lindsey kellogg editor-in-chief ina kosova executive editor tony liu, caroline woronoff managing editors

matt keenan executive editor, campusblue-

Yours,

print.com

layla quran, norman archer managing editor, campusblueprint.com

Lindsey Kellogg Editor-in-Chief

christopher phompraseut creative director jennifer waldkrich public relations and social media director

anisha padma photo editor ashley fox, ally mickler pr assistants ina kosova, matt keenan, tony liu, caroline woronoff, layla quran, norman archer, jennifer waldkrich, wilson sink, anita simha, sami lachgar, duncan yetman, kelly hughes, cole wilhelmi, sandy alkoutami, dory macmillan. ally mickler staff writers christopher phompraseut, delaney mcguire, ashley fox, conor atkins, ashley anderson, lindsey kellogg designers

anisha padma photographers tanner glenn treasurer

Cover Art: Pattern courtesy of Ashzstock

2 • May 2015

Introducing the New Campus BluePrint Website campusblueprintunc.wordpress.com

May 2015

•

PACKED IN

The politics and legality of gerrymandering DUNCAN YETMAN

“Allowing the legislature to dictate restructuring is akin to allowing a student to dictate the structure of their exam: both are likely to use the system, whether actively or assively, towards their advantage.” 4 • May 2015

n little over a month the Supreme outweighs its assumed significance. Court will begin arguments for a Redistricting has long been used bevy of cases -- Bourke v. Beshear, as a political tool, though the pracObergefell v. Hodges, DeBoer v. Sny- tice has grown worse in the past decder, and Tanco v. Haslam – that have ade. The term refers to the regular the potential to drastically alter U.S. process of adjusting the makeup of policy regarding same-sex marriages. districts to the decennial U.S. Census, Over the past few months, howev- the goal of which is to have districts er, another case – though receiving a whose makeup is politically reprefraction of the political attention – has sentative of the state. In order to the ability to radically influence pol- fully appreciate the implications of itics on a similar scale. The Supreme redistricting, it is useful to see what Court case Arizona State Legislature happens when things don’t work out. v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Below are two diagrams: one with Commission is, admittedly, a rela- competitive redistricting and one tively banal case on the surface. At gerrymandered. In the competitive issue is the authority of the Arizona example, each district is regularlegislature to regulate redistricting, ly-shaped and gives both grey and and whether a ballot initiative, or popular vote, can c h a n g e r e d i s t r i c ting laws. Its impact, h o w e v e r, both on local and national COURTESY OF DUNCAN YETMAN politics, far

white a competitive race. In the ger- an advantage during one political rymandered district, however, the cycle, and maintain this advantage white voters easily win one district, via alteration of the state’s districts. but lose out of the other three – de- At noted by Nicholas Stephanopospite having the same number of ulos in “Partisan Gerrymandering votes as grey does. and the Efficiency Gap”, there has If this sounds boring, don’t worry, been numerous cases over the past the term is as appealing as “net neu- few decades –-both Democratic and trality” is to the technologically inept. Republican –-where gerrymanderRedistricting, however, has the pow- ing has been used to gain a politier to change the political makeup of cal advantage. Even North Carolina’s a state – and nowhere is this better districts in 2001, though they can be exemplified than in North Carolina. considered fair by comparison, still The GOP’s rise to power in the NC state legislature in 2010 coincided with a new census, and with it, an opportunity to alter the makeup of North Carolina’s districts. The 2011 redistricting process, controlled by the Republican legislature, shifted several districts to have a greater percentage of Democratic voters, which in turn made competitive races in other districts shift towards Republicans. The net differences can be subtle – one or two percentage points – but that is all that is needed to change the PHOTO COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS outcome in an election. In the end, had many irregularities that benefitthe resulting districts looked more ted both Republicans and Democrats akin to a child’s scribbling, if one in certain counties. were to be so complimentary. Fortunately there are ways to adDespite its ridiculousness, howev- dress this problem, both inside and er, gerrymandering is not an issue outside the legislature. In North to be taken lightly. What makes ger- Carolina there are already two birymandering dangerous is not nec- partisan bills under consideration essarily its immediate impact but that attempt to solve this problem. rather its cyclical nature. The gerry- Both have the goal of limiting bias mandered districts can change the in redistricting, but do so by different political makeup of a state such that means. a Republican or Democratic legislaHouse Bill 92 gives the Legislative ture is nearly guaranteed in every Services Office, a nonpartisan branch election. As it is the legislature that of government, the authority to draft dictates redistricting policy, one po- a redistricting proposal, which would litical party can, in theory, obtain then be approved by the legislature

House Bill 49 adopts a more moderate approach, nominating members to a non-partisan redistricting committee to limit the potential for partisan gain However well designed, the bills’ chances of passing are slim – especially when you consider the enormous conflict of interest at play. Any bill brought to the floor, though it may be considered nonpartisan in nature, is bound to have elements that favor certain legislators. Allowing the legislature to dictate redistricting is essentially akin to allowing a student to dictate the structure of their exam -- both are likely to use the system, whether actively or passively, towards their advantage. All of these problems – the dangers of redistricting, conflicting interests, the cyclical nature of the process – demonstrate why the Supreme Court case is so critical -- not just in North Carolina, but nationally as well. If there is to be any effort against gerrymandering in the future it will have to be done by those who are hurt from the system, not benefitting from it. To this end, the ballot initiatives being debated are the easiest, and possibly the only legitimate hope towards a truly nonpartisan approach to redistricting. The Supreme Court, in its upcoming ruling, can protect this process, or entrench it in a legislature destined to maintain the status quo.

May 2015

•

A CLOSEUP ON NETANYAHU’S VICTORY: A tragedy for the peace process? SANDY ALKOUTAMI

n March 17 of this year Israeli voters elected Israel’s twentieth 120-member parliament, or Knesset. During these elections, citizens vote for party lists, rather than individual candidates. After votes are counted, seats in the Knesset are allocated according to the percentage of the national vote parties win. This year, Israel’s voter turnout indicated a 16-year peak since 1999. With 78.1 percent of six million eligible citizens voting, Israel’s voting population revealed the gravity of this particular election. These voters were able to choose from 25 running partings. The chief parties include: the governing Likud 6 • May 2015

Party, which is led by right-winged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and takes an ardent stance against Palestinians and Iran; the Zionist Union, which is headed by Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni, and aims to continue Palestinian-Israeli negotiations and resolve conflicts with the United States; the Joint List, a group of Arab parties that consisting of Israel’s Arab minority population; Kulanu, which is led by Moshe Kahlon, who is believes progress rests on economic growth; Jewish Home, led by high-tech millionaire Naftali Bennett and supporter of West Bank settlers; and Yesh Atid, which is led by Yair Lapid, who relief for the Israel’s mid-

dle socioeconomic class. However, according to recent 2014 law, a party must win 3.25 percent of the vote to be represented in parliament. After voters cast their ballots, 10 parties passed the electoral threshold--the lowest number since Israel’s 1992 election. After an arguably bruising campaign, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu swept past his chief rival, the Zionist Union, and won. Once 99.5 percent of the votes were counted, the YNet news site reported that Netanyahu’s party earned 29 or 30 of the 120 Knesset seats on Wednesday Morning after the election. The Zionist Union only received 24 seats,

placing it right behind the Likud Party. Israeli political analysts, however, agreed that Netanyahu had the advantage throughout the campaigning process, despite the fact that opposing parties pledged an electoral battle. But what does Netanyahu’s win mean for both Israel and the United States? In order to fully conceive an extended political future with Netanyahu, it is pivotal to trace some of his most defining campaign moments. Two instances of Netanyahu’s campaign suggested that the Prime Minister’s vexed approach toward politics reached an all-time high: his visit to Congress and his vow to prevent the existence of a Palestinian state. On March 2, 2015, Netanyahu visited the United States to speak on behalf of Israel in front of Congress, which yielded unpopular responses from US citizens. For some, Netanyahu’s decision to come to the United States without President Obama’s consent was unjustified. Although his stated purpose was to fulfill a “moral obligation” to discuss America’s foreign policy and nuclear negotiations with Iran, Netanyahu’s true intent did not align with this claim. Regardless of what Netanyahu said during the address, the nuclear negotiations are a process that should remain at an internal US-Iranian pace. Others argue that his address was not about long-term American-Israeli relations, which is far too institutionally entrenched to be affected by one prime minister, nor was it about Netanyahu speaking on behalf of all Jews. Ultimately, it was Israel’s attempt to cement its position as a regional superpower against its rivals. Rather than inserting policy interests and opinions in a more appropriate (read: less confrontational) manner, Netanyahu used this unwarranted address

as a way to further Israeli geopolitical power and defiance in face of international restraints.

the biggest party, the Left will win control and form a coalition with the support of the Arab party.” By campaigning to stop the Herzog-andIt is Netanyahu’s Livni-led Zionist speech to his sup“After being asked Union, Netanyahu porters in Netanalso directed his on March 11 if ya, Israel, howevderogatory rhetthis statement er, that stirred the oric toward the strongest public Arab population in indicated that outcry. On MonIsrael. He warned he would never day March 11, Nethe country that support the tanyahu promised there were “masright-wing Israelis sive efforts from creation of a that if they electabroad to increase Palestinian ed him, he would the Arab turnout” state, Netanyahu and to “build a prevent the creation of a Palgovernment with responded: estinian state--a the Arab list.” NeIndeed.” vow that dispels tanyahu even esprevious committablished an ulments to both US Congress and the timatum: vote for him or endure a United Nations. In May 2011, during leftist government backed by Arab an address to a Congress joint ses- supporters. In doing so, Netanyahu sion, Netanyahu promised to accept disparaged Israeli Arabs, which aca Palestinian states and hold Israel count for 20 percent of the nation’s as a model of fairness to minorities. population. The first of these commitments was Ultimately, Netanyahu has not just shredded when he stated, “Who ever dismissed a two-state solution- he moves to create a Palestinian state has also denied the idea of Israel as or intends to withdraw from territory a state with Arabs coexisting peaceis simply yielding territory for radical fully alongside Jews. Despite its efIslamic terrorists attacks against Is- forts to remove itself from the peace rael.” After being asked on March 11 process with Palestine, Israel will inif this statement indicated that he evitably play a paramount role in any would never support the creation of method toward a two-state solution. a Palestinian state, Netanyahu re- So, is Netanyahu’s victory a tragedy sponded: “Indeed.” for this peace process? To this, I can But Netanyahu did not just reject only respond like Netanyahu himArab sovereignty in Palestinian ter- self: “Indeed.” ritories (or a potential state)--he has also rejected Arab empowerment within Israel and dispelled his second promise for minorities. Throughout his campaign, he Netanyahu has made Arab citizens in Israel the enemies of the 2015 election. He told his supporters and those forming their voting opinion that “If Likud is not May 2015

•

“ WE DESERVE MORE” The Fight for $15 and a Union in North Carolina LAYLA QURAN

t 4:30am on a Monday morning, the only sound on a still neighborhood street is of chirping crickets, and Kim Thomas arriving to work. While the rest of the city sleeps, she begins the first hour of her over100-hour work week. Thomas is one of 2 million home care aides working in the United States, and despite the long hours, she loves her job. “I have two degrees, and I’m working in a low minimum wage job, because it is something that I like to do,” Thomas said. “And I’m trying to make a difference in the world. This is something that I chose to do, but I didn’t choose the salary.” According to a PHI PolicyWorks report, the average hourly wage for a home care worker in 2013 was only $9.61, which amounts to just $13,000 a year. Thomas has been working as a home care aide for six years. “But I keep going because I have to. Not because I want to, I have to. I have to--to make ends meet”, Thomas said. According to the PHI report, wages are so low for home care workers partly because the work is “rooted in the history of exploitation of la8 • May 2015

bor based on race and gender, particularly the devaluation of women’s labor in the household”. More than half of home care workers are people of color, and nearly 90 percent are women. And although the need for caregivers like Thomas is growing every day, and home care will create more new jobs than any other sector in the next 10 years, the turnover rate is skyrocketing. One out of two home care workers leaves the job every year. High turnover rates mean poorer care for the elderly and people with disabilities in our communities, the people that depend on home care workers every day to maintain their quality of life. But last year Thomas and thousands of other home care workers in the US joined a powerful cause: the Fight for $15 movement, an international movement for workers’ rights to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour and have the right to join

a union. The Fight for $15 movement began in November 2012 with 200 workers in New York City, and has since grown tremendously to thousands of workers in 150 cities in 2013 and an international movement in 2014. What began as a couple hundred fast food employees has advanced rapidly into thousands of fast food workers, home care providers, airport workers and retail employees across the world. Another one of those workers is Kwanza Brooks, one of the first fast food workers in the South to walk out of her job at McDonald’s. Brooks says the money she made is simply not enough to pay her bills every week. According to the National Employment Law Project, nearly 90% of individuals who work in a front-line position in the fast food industry make a median hourly wage of only $8.94. “Every week I do struggle, between

“ And I’m trying to make a difference in the world. This is something that I chose to do, but I didn’t choose the salary. “

“People listen to the young folks”, Brooks said. “When you start talking about something positive, and you are that focused, and they see your action, trust and believe you will get the walls to shake a little bit faster.”

making the decisions that people should not have to make. Which bill I’m going to pay, which bill I’m going to leave behind.” Additionally, last December, the National Labor Relations Board Office of the General Counsel issued complaints against McDonald’s franchisees for “making statements and taking actions against them for engaging in activities aimed at improving their wages and working conditions”. These retributive actions include reduction in hours, threats, surveillance, interrogation, discharges, and restrictions on communicating with union representatives. North Carolina has the lowest union membership rate in the country at 3.5%. It is a ‘right-to-work’ state, which prohibits any agreements between unions and employers and holds a ban on collective bargaining by public employees. Absence of unions creates a breeding ground for poor workers rights and fear of reprisal for speaking out. Brooks emphasized the need for student involvement in the Fight for $15 movement. “People listen to the young folks”, Brooks said. “When you start talking about something positive, and you are that focused, and they see your action, trust and believe you will get the walls to shake a little bit faster.”

PHOTO COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Another movement working alongside the Fight for $15 movement is the Fight for 15k, led by an organization of adjunct professors across the nation. The movement demands $15,000 per course in salary and benefits for adjunct professors. One of those professors, John Steen, is a UNC graduate and received his PhD at Emory University. He teaches at East Carolina University and grades more than 1600 pages of student work per semester, but says the university system is not doing its part.

As more universities look for ways to cut costs by hiring individuals as part-time adjunct professors instead of full time faculty members, Steen says the entire university system is impacted. “Faculty labor conditions are student learning conditions. Supporting faculty means supporting students. It means stronger campus communities.”

May 2015

•

The US Department of Education reports that 75% of college faculty are adjunct, but only 30 years ago that same percentage of faculty were in tenured track positions. Adjunct professors receive significantly less pay than tenured track professors-receiving on average only $20,000 per year- and often receive no benefits. Despite the fact that tuition has risen at US universities, that money is not being used to pay faculty members. “I’ve invested in students; my professors have invested in me, and I’m looking to the system to invest in those of us who work on students’ behalf ”, Steen said. Mary K. Henry, international president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), a union of 2 million workers, spoke at UNC

last week on the importance of this movement for workers and adjunct professors. “We are going to make sure that the people on the front lines of this industry have enough money in their pockets to not have to choose what bill to pay, but also imagine a better life for our children.”, Henry said. Movement organizers also say it is crucial that supporters historicize the Fight for $15 among previous movements for workers’ rights. Two weeks after two Memphis garbage collectors, Echol Cole and Robert Walker, were crushed to death by a malfunctioning truck, more than 1,000 black sanitation workers began to strike for better wages, benefits, union recognition and job safety. The Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike in 1968 led

to a final deal months later, when the City Council recognized a union for sanitation workers and guaranteed a better wage. “ They stood on one simple principle: we deserve more”, Brooks said. That principle will be on full display on April 15th, when thousands of workers and adjunct faculty members across the world will stand in massive rallies in their cities to demand $15 per hour (and $15,000 per course for adjunct professors), workers’ rights, and a union. In the Triangle area, workers and supporters will meet at the Shaw University Quad. For more information on the movement and to sign up for a rally near you, visit april15.org

STATES WITH THE LEAST UNION MEMBERSHIP TEXAS (4.5%) VIRGINIA (4.1%) SOUTH CAROLINA (3.9%) GEORGIA (3.7%) NORTH CAROLINA (3.5%) SOURCE: BUREAU OF LABOR 2008 SURVEY

10 • May 2015

Limits To GDP TONY LIU

n our Western cultural imaginary, where pundits discuss third-world development, national GDP growth, and increased consumption, progress is privileged and growth unquestioned as a desired societal goal. Nevertheless, this singular dedication to growth has come at a cost environmentally, socially, and spiritually, embedding itself into the fabric of our social relations, realities, and life experiences. As these costs come to a crux, we must find new frameworks for transforming the way we view our own identities and desires as well as those of our society. GDP, the indicator most often correlated with standard of living, is a measure of societal production based on the final goods and services produced within a country. However, the jump to designate GDP as the end-all-beall indicator of well-being is removed from historical memory. Primarily spawning from the work of economist Simon Kuznets, initially gross domestic product was calculated as part of the System of National Accounts for the U.S. economy. While engaging in the work of creating an economic index on health, Kuznets himself noted the potential pitfalls of GDP - “No income measurement

undertakes to estimate the reverse side of income, that is, the intensity and unpleasantness of effort going into the earning of income. The welfare of a nation can, therefore, scarcely be inferred from a measure-

“...we must find new frameworks for transforming the way we view our own identities and desires as well as those of our society.” ment of national income as defined [in GDP statistics].” If the father of GDP himself noted the measures’ limitations, especially as an indicator of well-being, the question arises of why GDP has remained the dominant measure of societal health,[1] let alone the one which drives economic policy-making. On one hand, high GDP is positively correlated with higher rates of education, lower infant mortality,

and stronger living standards. Nevertheless, as scholars in critical development studies have noted, both the West’s historical attempts at bringing GDP to the Global South and the measures use as a desired goal for nation-states are connected to the development project of the 20th century. Philip McMichael of Cornell University has described the two initial phases of the development experience as the Development Project and the Globalization Project. Under the Development Project, governments of so-called developing countries were viewed as entities that could intervene with markets in order to serve their respective state’s economic growth. During this initial Project, development arose in the lexicon of American dialogue, as President Harry S. Truman brought the term to prominence during his inaugural address on January 20th, 1949. Although the majority of Truman’s speech dealt with challenging the Soviet Union by strengthening U.S. military relations in the third world, Truman ended by remarking how the U.S. “must embark on a bold new program for making the benefits of... scientific advances and industri May 2015

•

al progress for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas,” especially since “more than half the people of the world [were] living in conditions approaching misery.” While one must ask if half of the world’s people were truly living in misery, Gustavo Esteva of the Universidad de la Tierra Mexico notes that “two billion people became underdeveloped... transmogrified into an inverted mirror of others’ reality” ultimately removed from “all their diversity.” Transforming into an amorphous other, the same colonial civilizing mission of Western imperialism during the 20th century, came to manifest with Truman’s speech. Nonetheless, the effect remained the same - Truman’s speech shifted the trajectory of foreign policy practices and U.S. government action in relation to other countries throughout the world. In contrast to the Development Project, the Globalization Project was marked by various Western nations’ obsession with markets and their supposedly democratic nature both contributing to, and deriving from ne12 • May 2015

oliberal policies of privatization and free trade throughout the world. From Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher to shock doctrine economic policies implemented in Bolivia and the Chicago Boys’ policies in Chile, countries in the Global North and South espoused ideologies supporting free trade at all cost. Under the Globalization Project, the cultural rhetoric of growth and progress was emboldened into practice, yet were only to be achieved through policies that supported Western political, economic, and social agendas. The issues with the dominant narrative of growth and progress are not only consequences associated with a growth-at-all-costs mentality, but also the fact that endless growth cannot last. In a seemingly obvious manner, infinite growth on a finite planet is impossible, and more and more journalists, environmentalists, scholars, and the general public have taken note of this idea. Author John Michael Greer explores the cultural and planetary ramifications of finite resource exploitation through the phenomena of Peak Oil,

the point when oil production has passed its maximum rate of extraction and is thus expected to decline. According to Greer, Peak Oil challenges deep-seated notions of progress, as ideas of perpetual growth and endless betterment are fundamentally challenged by dwindling oil quantities[4] . Peak Oil precludes the comforting vision of inventing and escaping global issues through increasingly advanced technology recapitulated in movies like Interstellar. On the other hand, Peak Oil makes Western consumers, particularly those in the United States, take note of the reality where “five per cent of humanity” consumes “a quarter of the world’s energy resources.” Under these circumstances, development as increasing human consumption to the rates of the average U.S. citizen is ultimately impossible, requiring another world of resources. While improving consumption and the standard of living for billions of people is not necessarily undesirable, improving those rates to those of the West are impossible forcing Western consumers to recon-

sider their own lives and actions. Ingrained in this consumption and commitment to growth are permanent impacts on the landscapes of earth; environmental degradation and the pernicious effects of climate change are threatening the survival of billions of the world’s poorest as well as the lived experiences of everyone as well. Ranging from Bill McKibben’s The End of Nature, Vandana Shiva’s Soil Not Oil, to Naomi Klein’s This Changes Everything, public intellectuals, environmentalists, and journalists are increasingly noting the issues of hyper-consumption, climate change, and obsessions with growth embodied in an index like GDP, since our planetary impacts have jeopardized the possibilities for our own existences. With rising ecological and environmental pressures and an index that doesn’t recognize the well-being of people, a variety of alternative frameworks have been proposed which recognize the importance of ecological health, community, and well-being. The United Nations Development Program’s Human Development Index focuses on human life. While HDI considers market factors such as income, its “key dimensions” focus on “a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and…a decent standard of living” also including criteria on gender and social equality. On the other hand, Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness starts with a framework of relationality between humans and the planet focusing on criteria such as ecological and cultural diversity, community vitality, and psychological well-being. The Happy Planet Index ranks nations based on “how many long and happy lives each produces per unit of environmental output” creating a weighted composite measure for national success. Indexes such as GNH or HPI reimagine what constitutes national success – one not solely based on markets or consumption, but more importantly, quality of life, cultural livelihood, and environmental health. Rooted in the histories and experiences of indigenous populations, Buen Vivir - also known as Sumak Kawsay, Suma Kamaña, and other names - reflects “the satisfaction of needs...the healthy flourishing of all in peace and harmony with nature, the indefinite prolongation of cultures...and the expansion and flourishing of liberties, opportunities, capacities and potentials.” Impacting dialogues about society and life throughout Latin America, the processes and ideas encapsulated in Buen Vivir are coming to reflect reimagined visions of what society can be in Latin America and throughout the world. While an important potential paradigm shift, Professor Rudi Colloredo-Mansfeld has described the importance

of seeing how Buen Vivir manifests in the lives of people altered by its ideas. “It’s important to note that the testing ground for ideas like Buen Vivir are the lives of people and their communities. The indigenous people in the Andes are keen to have a higher material standard of living, and it’s navigating the balance between theory and how these ideas play out in their own lives,” he said. Keeping in mind respect for how alternative frameworks manifest in the lives of people, Buen Vivir, Gross National Happiness, UNDP’s HDI, and more, provide the framework not only to help ameliorate environmental degradation but also reimagine the goals and values of various societies, what it means to live-well, and how our own lives can contribute towards the vision of a different future. As Albert Einstein said, “we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”

May 2015

•

C Thrive How-To as an

Anxious

College Student LINDSEY KELLOGG

14 • May 2015

ollege is a time of balancing stress from many sources: the stress of schoolwork and extracurriculars, the pressures of a social life, the dilemma of trying to fund your time here, and the stress of making it all worth it by finding a job before graduation. All while you’re in a new place passing a ton of people each day who seem to have it all together. For those of you (like me) who fall under the “anxious” label, I have some advice for you to keep it all together and make college a pretty positive experience. Stop, you say. Why would I take advice from an anxious senior? Well, primarily because I’m doing a hell of a lot better now than I was when I was an anxious first year and sophomore. Most of this list comes from my personal experience or talking to other people about their own experiences.

Just talk to people

Talking to new people in new situations can be excruciatingly hard if you have anxiety. You are constantly on edge about how other perceive you and what you should be saying. But, not to be insulting, most people are not paying that much attention to all those attributes you worry about. People aren’t really thinking about you too much—they are thinking of themselves, what they want to say next, what they’re doing that evening. They are not judging you. We perceive most people as seemingly nice normal people who we may want to see again and make connections with. (And, for those few that are judgmental, you don’t want to know them.) Just relax and talk to as many people as you find interesting. The student body here is so large that you will click with a few people eventually.

Just apply

In the same vein of jobs or other positions, just keep applying. I can’t tell you how many internships and undergraduate fellowships I was rejected from my first year of college. It really sent my head in circles thinking I wasn’t good enough. But, just keep applying to things that interest you and prepare well to talk about them. UNC is full of ultra-talented students and competition is tough, even for things you’re well-qualified for--it’s my belief that developing the ability to get continuously rejected is a valuable skill. In job interviews, most people come off as nervous anyways, so prepare a good message to talk about when the interview comes. In fact, doing interviews repeatedly, while it may be exhausting, will give you more confidence for the next time around.

It’s my belief that developing the ability to get continuously rejected is a valuable skill

Plan and prepare

So your mind is spinning about that presentation you have to give tomorrow or an upcoming phone interview for an internship. One way to stop the worrying spiral in your mind is to be as prepared as possible. If you truly know a lot about your subject matter, you will feel more comfortable talking about it and answering any questions. Write down answers to potential questions, do more than the required background reading, and practice speaking out loud. Your preparedness will help you feel comfortable enough to do a good job. Setting yourself to work is a good way to get through an anxious spurt and calm your mind, as well.

Write stuff down

Have you ever been stressed out by all the racing thoughts in your head—problems that just seem to build on one another? Take a seat and a pen and write down some of them down. Writing in a journal or notebook when you’re feeling anxious can release some of these thoughts from of your head and calm you—in fact, as you’re writing, you can view them more clearly and see which ones are more important and which ones are trivial.

Exercise

Exercise is a great tool for mental clarity. For anxious people whose thoughts are often going at 100 miles per minute, it can be incredibly refreshing to go on a run where your only focus

May 2015

•

is the road in front of you and the Beyoncé remix pounding in your ears. It’s like pushing a mental reset button! (Even if you’re one of those “I hate running” people, it’s worth a try.)

If necessary, therapy

If you feel like anxiety is interfering with your daily life, you may want to talk to a therapist about it. Believe me, therapy is an institution in this day and age. Nearly a dozen of my friends have gone to talk to someone about anxiety, depression or other issues at some point in their lives, as have I. (And those are only the ones who have told me about it!) College is a good point in time to start this because student therapy is free. Just be careful, you may not find a therapist that fits your needs the first time, so don’t be afraid to shop around.

You have the power to change your situation

As I’ve written and reread this piece, I’ve worried that it comes off as kind of cheesy or falsely upbeat. But, since, I’m a graduating senior, I really did want to leave some piece of advice for the rest of the student body to hold on to--share my wisdom, as it were. And I believe this is something I’m fairly qualified to talk about. I didn’t start my college life here at UNC; I started it at a typical Fancy Massachusetts Private College that I thought was the epitome of intelligence and class. (Tufts, if you’re super curious.) However, something always felt… off. I was anxious all the time and felt separated from almost all of the rest of the student body, but I didn’t know why I felt so awful all the time. Something very important didn’t click until midway through my sophomore year: I could leave.

16 • May 2015

So I did. (I admit the pretty large amount of privilege that this decision entails, but if you truly need to make a big move like this, there are resources to help: counseling, advising, transfer programs.) Sometimes the most out-of-the-box solution (such as completely changing your surroundings instead of trying to fit yourself into a situation that’s no good) is the one that works the best. And if you find yourself with a lot of anxiety, it could be a symptom of a larger problem your brain is trying to signal to you to deal with. Best of luck to you, my anxious and less anxious readers alike! I find these kinds of problems are more common than you would think, so don’t be afraid to further open the discussion with your own friends and classmates.

For more resources and discussion opportunities, consider checking out Active Minds and their UNC chapter.

Keystone Pipeline XL and Environmental Politics KELLY HUGHES

bama has recently addressed the hotly contested Keystone XL Pipeline. The Keystone pipeline would transport tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada to refineries in Texas, a trip of over two thousand miles. It would transverse six US states and numerous rivers and, once completed, carry hundreds of thousands of barrels of tar sands oil each day. Although part of the pipeline has already been built, the fourth stage, the Keystone XL, has remained stalled. The Keystone XL pipeline extension was proposed in 2008 and has raised controversy over the potential environmental impacts such as the impact on sensitive ecosystem around the proposed area. There is also potential for oil spills from the pipeline and contamination of water supply during the transportation process. For example, the pipeline crosses sensitive wetlands in Nebraska other states covering the Ogallala Aquifer--an aquifer that could be easily contaminated by leaking oil. However, the pipeline also generates controversy and questions over the overall use of tar sands oil, which has a more intense environmental effect than conventional oil. In addition to being more energy intensive and requiring large amounts of water, blasting oil out of tar sands also generates more greenhouse gas emissions. The water used in this extraction process,

once released, pollutes surrounding water systems and could threaten local water supplies. However, the pipeline could have economic advantages such as generating jobs and increasing energy security by supplying a steady stream of energy to the US from a friendly country.

the Senate approved an adapted bill. However, on February 24, 2015, President Obama vetoed the Keystone XL legislation. Although attempts to override Obama’s veto failed, debates on the Keystone XL continue. Obama’s decision to veto the Keystone XL is only one of the latest in a pattern of strong environmental decisions he has made throughout his presidency. In his administration, Obama has set up new initiatives for reducing pollution and counteracting effects of climate change. In the beginning of his presidency, he pledged to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by 17% by 2020. Last summer, he also announced PHOTO COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS new Environmental Protection Agency regulations on The controversy over the pipe- existing power plants. The Supreme line has extended into the political Court upheld his rules in a rare ensphere. Republicans in general have vironmentally-friendly decision. His been supportive of the pipeline con- administration also imposed toughstruction, mainly because of the job er restrictions on fracking operacreation potential and increase in en- tions to minimize water pollution ergy security. While some Democrats threats. Obama has also focused on support it, others are against it for its transitioning to more sustainable environmental impact. As the Repub- energy forms, including $90 billion licans took control of Congress this in subsidies for green energy in the year, they prioritized passing the Key- post-recession stimulus plan. Howstone XL pipeline legislation. While ever, though many of his policies repthe US State Department is review- resent a step in the right direction, ing the pipeline, members of the Re- most remain vague and need to be publican Party in Congress wanted to strengthened to counter the environgrant the permit necessary to contin- mental problems facing the US. ue it regardless. On January 9th, the Houses approved the measure and May 2015

•

PHOTO COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Activism

At The

MATT KEENAN

e in the show business have our religion too - on every day, the show must go on!” The Jazz Singer revolutionized the way Americans watch movies, by, for the first time ever, synchronizing sound and acting in a film. Then, in 1929, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, presented the first ever Academy Awards at the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel. Eighty-six years later, the Oscars have taken on a much more political role, and reflect the unique cultural crossroads that contemporary American society now lives in. Movies generate billions of dollars in revenue every year, which shows that Americans have become enthralled with the magic of watching movies. The Oscars have become a staple of American culture, which is becoming more and more of a slog to get through. In 2015, the Oscar presentation lasted three hours and forty-seven minutes. In the same amount of time, you could watch Aragorn recruit an army of dead guys, save Minas Tirith, and distract yet another orcish army while Frodo destroys the Ring of Power, and still have time to take a reasonably long bathroom break. Do not count on the Oscars being that exciting,

18 • May 2015

either, as the majority of that three hours and forty-seven minutes will be taken up by people thanking people that you probably have never even heard of. For decades, the typical Oscar acceptance speech would involve the winning director, actor, or musical composer thanking everyone he or she possibly can in the span of two or three minutes. Considering the fact that the Oscars’ very purpose is to recognize outstanding achievements for films, one might expect the bulk of the show to be dedicated to winners’ acceptance speeches. What has happened in recent years, however, is a shift from the content of movies towards more political and activist topics. The most notable film in recent memory that I, probably like most other Americans, associate with an activist agenda, is James Cameron’s Avatar from 2009. Avatar was nominated for Best Picture at the 2010 Oscars, with films like The Blind Side and The Hurt Locker for company. Avatar was not only a groundbreaking film in the way the movie was actually filmed, but also in popularizing an all-too-obvious political agenda through a film. Yet, an activist agenda underneath the plot of the film did nothing to take

Oscars away from the drama and action, as evidenced by the almost $2.8 billion it made in the box office. The popularity of Avatar signals a significant shift in American cultural attitudes that became most obvious at the 2015 Oscars. One look at the amount of money movies generate shows that Americans love going to movies, but what Americans may like even more, however, is a movie based on a true story, and that was exactly what happened at the 2015 Oscars. Almost all of the nominees for Best Picture,The Imitation Game, Selma, The Theory of Everything, Whiplash, and American Sniper, were all based on real events. Arguably as significant as the movies themselves, were the speeches that some of the winners delivered. J.K. Simmons (yes, he is the guy from all the Farmer’s Insurance Commercials) had this to say: “If I may, call your mom… If you’re lucky enough to have parents or two alive on this planet … Don’t text, don’t email. Call them on the phone tell them you love them. Talk to them for as long as they want

to hear you.” Alejandro Iñárritu, director of Birdman and a Mexican immigrant, which won Best Picture, said: “I pray that we can find and build the government that we deserve. I just pray that they [immigrants to America] can be treated with the same dignity and respect of the ones who came before and built this incredible immigrant nation.” Iñárritu’s speech capped off a night of personal, political, and reflective acceptance speeches that all came about as a result of a unique cultural crossroads that America is currently experiencing. The Imitation Game tells the incredible story of Alan Turing, a homosexual British man who helped break “Enigma,” the coding system of Nazi communications during World War II. The Imitation Game took home Best Adapted Screenplay, and Graham Moore delivered one of the more personal Oscar acceptances in recent times: “When I was 16 years old, I tried to kill myself because I felt weird and I felt different and I felt like I did not belong, and now I’m standing here. … Stay weird, stay different.” Eddie Redmayne, who won Best Actor for his role as Steven Hawking in The Theory of Everything said in his

speech: “ This Oscar - this belongs to all of those people around the world battling ALS. Perhaps the most powerful moment of the night came when John Legend performed the song “Glory” from Selma live with a supporting choir. Many of the audience members were in tears at its conclusion, and Legend himself said: “ The struggle for freedom and justice is real. We live in the most incarcerated country in the world. There are more black men under correctional control today than there were under slavery in 1850.” Almost all the movies up for major awards at the Oscars, whether through the movies themselves, or by the acceptance speeches of their actors, directors, or other personnel, made some sort of political or activist statement, which set the 2015 Oscars apart from all other 86 Oscar presentations. There are many different hypotheses as to why the 2015 Oscars became so political, the easiest of which being that there just so happened to be many great films released in 2014 that carried political weight. That stance is too simplistic, however. Movies have the special ability to transcend reality, and to bring to life social reforms that significantly alter society. At the end of 2014, 34 states had legalized gay marriage, and six of the states who had not legalized gay marriage had their marriage laws under Supreme Court review. The world changes every day, and movies are not immune to that change. In 2013, Alan Turing was granted a posthumous pardon for his previous “crimes” of homosexuality. I believe it is more than mere chance that a movie about the homosexual war hero was released very soon after his pardon, and right as same-sex marriage is becoming legal in more and more states. As Annette Bening said, “Acting is not about being famous, it’s about exploring the human soul.” May 2015

•

THE END of the

POVERTY ENTER:

A Look at a Systemic Problem DORY MACMILLAN

20 • May 2015

PHOTO COURTESY OF UNC LAW

“We rage against the politics because it is the politics that we are willing to look at--not those who are malnourished, unprotected, or unsupported.“

n February 18, 2015, the University of North Carolina system Board of Governors’ “Working Group” published a report, having been tasked with the job of reviewing the many research centers on the UNC systems’ campus. Of the 240 centers, the Working Group recommended 16 for specific campus review--giving these the possibility of being closed. Of those 16, UNC’s Center for Work, Poverty, and Opportunity was one of three institutes, which the group recommended to “discontinue” along with East Carolina University’s Center for Biodiversity and North Carolina Central University’s Institute for Civic Engagement and Social Change. The Board of Governors formally chose to close down the Center, along with several others, later that month. Regarding the reasoning for the Poverty Center’s closure, BOG member John Fennebresque remained fervent that the Center did not demonstrate an “appreciable impact” on the existence of poverty nor did its mission “enhance the

May 2015

•

educational mission” of the university as a whole. Fennebresque’s opinion piece-written under a weak and unconvincing thesis that the BOG is “committed to ensuring North Carolina has the best public university system in America”--fails to provide any evidence to support his claims that the Poverty Center lacked depth or impact. Additionally, his “commitment” to North Carolina’s educational system is evident in its minimal scope; he limits his c o m m i tment to those with wealth or opportunity who take part in North Carolina’s schools, consciously excluding those who don’t. Perhaps the most troubling part of his editorial is the fact that he is unable to recognize the significant connection between the University’s educational mission and the mission of the Poverty Center. The mission of the University is to “serve as a center for research, scholarship and creativity to teach a diverse community of undergraduate, graduate, and professional students to become the next generation of leaders.” Similarly, the Poverty Center is a “non-partisan, interdisciplinary institute designed to study, examine, document, and advocate for proposal, policies and services to mitigate poverty in North Carolina and the nation.” In both cases, these institutions use research to develop leadership strategies. Fennebresque, a successful Charlotte lawyer who himself 22 • May 2015

graduated from UNC-Chapel Hill, might fail to see the correlation but UNC students do not. In fact, Fennebresque’s behavior can almost be described as naieveté; a similar naieveté demonstrated through the Supreme Court’s removal of integral aspects of the 1965 Voting Rights Act in 2014, under Shelby v. Holder. In that case, the Court ruled on two provisions of the Voting Rights Act, and one in particular resonates with the situation at hand. States and counties with a predisposition toward discrimination were mandated to have “preclearance” to ensure that the practices and standards for each voting event did not deny U.S. citizens the right to vote based on race under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. In 2014, the Court ruled that information requiring preclearance was outdated -- the 40-year-old records of particularly discriminatory counties no longer reflected the current state of things. Since this ruling, many civil rights activists have spurned the Court’s opinion, arguing that naieveté in which the Court published their opinion will negatively impact minorities who vote in racially charged districts. In oral arguments, Justice Scalia drew criticism for arguing that Congress reauthorized Section 5 because of “racial entitlement,” rather than need. Why is this relevant? In the same way that Scalia failed to recognize the true discrimi-

nation that is still persistent in districts across the United States, Fennebresque fails to recognize the indistinguishable and irrevocable connection between our University’s mission and the mission of the Poverty Center, as well as how the work to alleviate poverty cannot be removed from the work to create the next generation of leaders. In the weeks following the Board’s recommendation, Poverty Center supporters have railed against the Board of Trustees. Among these supporters is John Boger, Dean of the UNC School of Law. In a poignant letter posted on UNC Law’s website, Boger described UNC’s history of service -- a history of commitment to the people of North Carolina that has spanned generations, student bodies, and chancellors. On March 2, Gene Nichol, Executive Director of the Center for Poverty, Work and Opportunity, spoke to a group of students in an event sponsored by Young Democrats, the UNC Board of Governors Democracy Coalition, and Campus Y. His words were powerful and impassioned, but his lecture was likely not what most of the attendees expected. In fact, he began by saying that he would mention the Board of Governors, but then would talk about what he really wanted - poverty in North Carolina. When discussing the BOG’s decision, Nichol did not mince words noting that “the BOG closed the Poverty Center and then lied about what it did and why it did it. [They] issued some kind of gobbledygook explanation.” In this statement, Nichol referred to the BOG’s argument that the Poverty Center required too much funding when, in reality, the Poverty Center was privately funded. Nichol sees the closure as part of a larger “war on poverty,” which he argues has been an “unprece-

42%

9/10

18%

Percentage of the impoverished 6 million US children who live in the South

Fraction of states with child poverty rates >25% that are in the South

Percentage of NC that lives in poverty

dented” attack by the state of North Carolina on its most impoverished members. From Nichol’s perspective, the decision to close down the Poverty Center was just “part of a broader pattern coming out of Raleigh.” At that point, Nichol began to speak about poverty. “Right now, tonight, in the richest nation on earth, in the richest nation in history we have more poor people than any other moment in our long history” he said. In terms of NC’s “war on poor people,” Nichol went further. “We became the first state to kick people off of food stamps, to say that we were going to withdraw qualifying North Carolinians on food stamps.” It’s easy to rage against the machine. This is what Nichol meant when he brushed off the BOG’s decision in order to talk about the issue that really mattered. It is easy to be angry and to blame the government for some truly cruel actions. Yet as easy as it feels to write editorials or participate in rallies, these are not enough. At the end of the day, there are still 500,000 people in this state without health care. 18 percent of North Carolinians still live in poverty. 40 percent of children of color

still do not have enough to eat. We rage against the politics because it is the politics that we are willing to look at--not those who are malnourished, unprotected, or unsupported. In retrospect, it is evident that this was a particularly troubling semester for Carolina. As a student body, we lost three students due to hate. We felt the cold shoulder of an administration that continually failed to respond to the needs of our students--all of our students--who demanded equal protection and comfort on this campus. We saw the tireless work of Carolina’s most compassionate leaders demolished under the ill-informed words of “no appreciable impact.” It is remarkable that as Silent Sam continues to stand, an institute very much his opposite is forced to fall. And despite these gross injustices, our student body stands, ready to fight. It is not, however, the administration or the Board of Governors we are fighting, although they

do propagate the same injustices that have consistently and structurally discriminated against our fellow students and citizens for centuries. Instead, we are fighting the very structure that has allowed this discrimination to be maintained, not just our university system, but historical precedent set by the laws of this nation. We seek greatness, always, and in the words of our esteemed BOG chairman John Fennebresque, we want to create and maintain centers that “ensure they are contributing to our collective goal of preparing our great university system for the changes and challenges of the future.” What Fennebresque fails to realize is that Carolina looks towards a future where “challenges” surround meaningful attempts to historicize our nation and university’s histories, beginning with “changes” that focus on providing dignity to the many that our institutions have not recognized as one “of the people.” May 2015

•

Published with support from: Generation Progress, a division of the Center for American Progress. Generation Progress works to help young people — advocates, activists, journalists, artists — make their voices heard on issues that matter. Online at genprog.org. Also paid for in part by student fees.

Campus BluePrint is a non-partisan student publication that aims to provide a forum for open

dialogue on progressive ideals at UNC-Chapel Hill and in the greater community. 24 • May 2015