www.dukechronicle.com commentary
14 | MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2017
Dangerous steps for democracy
T H E I N D E P E N D E N T D A I LY AT D U K E U N I V E R S I T Y
The Chronicle
“
L
ast week, conservatives gathered at CPAC to hear a host of elected officials and activists give speeches, panel discussions and networking seminars centered around conservatism and its future in America. The spotlight quickly fell upon president Donald Trump as he unleashed a barrage of attacks on the “fake news” media, echoing his adviser Steve Bannon’s words characterizing the media as “globalist and corporatist” bogeyman. Trump has always maintained a combative relationship with political institutions. During his campaign, he derided established political parties and labor unions while pummeling journalists and the news media. This behavior continued throughout the interregnum period between the election and his inauguration. To the surprise of some moderate Republicans, it still has not ceased. As president, Trump has continued to level attacks at the press, deeming them “fake” and asserting that they are the “opposition party” and an “enemy of the people.” This denigration of the news media prevents the journalists who form it from properly fulfilling their most important missions: holding those in power accountable and pressuring political institutions to maintain transparency. Although Trump claims to attack
the media because various elements of it often acts in “opposition” to him, he errs when he treats that as a vice. It is precisely because the media stands in an opposing role to governments of the day that people should trust it. The notion that because the media attacks a partisan government it is thus lacking legitimacy is a perversion of the media’s entire purpose. Unfortunately, it is a notion that Trump’s administration seems determined to carry forward. Following the president’s CPAC address, his press
Editorial secretary, Sean Spicer, chose to bar select news organizations including the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times and CNN from a daily briefing—a highly aggressive and unusual move. Although we hold that Donald Trump’s attitude towards the media is toxic in and of its self, his surrogate’s choice to metastasize that attitude into action is frightening. In a democracy, presidents do not silence sources they dislike. Doing so, in the words of Sean Spicer himself, is tantamount to a step towards authoritarianism. Trump is, of course, not the first president to criticize
“the media.” Presidents before him have criticized news organizations for a host of reasons. The difference between them and Trump is that they never stooped so low as to challenge the basic integrity of the press. Ronald Reagan’s policy proposals were often mocked by pundits; George W. Bush was incessantly attacked over his decision to invade Iraq; Barack Obama was labeled as a radical socialist terrorist by several columnists. And although each of them defended themselves against attacks, they all understood that the news media is a fundamental institution of functioning democracy and that their personal spats with a few anchors or columnists were not worth undermining the news media for. The idea of suppressing media and mocking truth are something we might expect out of Vladimir Putin or Recep Tayyip Erdogan, not a U.S. President. Trump’s decision to not only take up those actions, but hold them high as the cornerstones of the conservative movement at CPAC was ill-judged and unfortunate. Trump has shown a willful refusal to hold himself accountable for his words and actions. Instead of rectifying that, he has chosen to frighten and silence organizations that can hold him accountable. That is bad news for a democracy and worse news for the truth.
If you can afford Cartier
onlinecomment “Nothing has sullied the ‘good Duke brand’ more than the shameful response of the administration, faculty, and campus feminists to the lacrosse team false rape allegations. Nothing Belle Knox has done comes close to the lingering effects of that sorry episode.” — “Man with Axe” responding to “Belle Knox revisited,” published February 21, 2017
”
LETTERS POLICY
Direct submissions to:
The Chronicle welcomes submissions in the form of letters to the editor or guest columns. Submissions must include the author’s name, signature, department or class, and for purposes of identification, phone number and local address. Letters should not exceed 325 words; contact the editorial department for information regarding guest columns. The Chronicle will not publish anonymous or form letters or letters that are promotional in nature. The Chronicle reserves the right to edit letters and guest columns for length, clarity and style and the right to withhold letters based on the discretion of the editorial page editor.
Est. 1905
The Chronicle
E-mail: chronicleletters@duke.edu Editorial Page Department The Chronicle Box 90858, Durham, NC 27708 Phone: (919) 684-2663 Fax: (919) 684-4696
The Chronicle
Inc. 1993
CLAIRE BALLENTINE, Editor
“
If you can afford Cartier, who can stop you?” At a panel on beauty standards organized by Duke Student Government’s Equity and Outreach Committee, first-year panelist Cara Smith articulated a common conception of wealth and status. Her statement, intended as a comment on the richpoor divide that is polarized by social standards of beauty, is truthful. However, it does not confront the circumstances that inform such a perspective. In short, we can easily admit that affordability is subjective—a better question becomes, why so? For example, although two individuals may share the means to apply for a job and have access to free public education that teaches the necessary skills for the job, their differing backgrounds will translate to only one of them receiving the job. In other cases, differing wages will be offered despite the equal work they will perform. What their “shared access to free public education” neglects to reveal is how much the zip code of their public school system determines the quality of their education. What their “shared ability to apply” for the position neglects to reveal is how much personal
Sabriyya Pate
visionary minds can attend a world-class university built for individuals of outstanding character and ability. A study published in January looked at anonymous tax filings to find that a majority of Duke students come from the top 10 percent of wealth in this country. It is not enough to acknowledge this and move on. It is neither the fault of the rich nor the poor, nor anyone in between. Still, the contrast is gripping. It is not the wealth itself that proves unbearable—it is the unawareness of some to this divide. As is with racial minorities, the burden of recognizing economic difference falls on the shoulders of the outgroup’s members. In other words, the well-off are less likely to recognize their privileges in a world where not everyone falls within their family’s tax bracket. Wealth is no fault. As indigestible as the prospect is to some, we cannot police richer individuals simply for being rich. While we can rightfully interrogate the origins of wealth, it is unconducive to disparage its recipients just for their ability to buy Canada Goose coats. Rather, we can push for awareness of these inequities. All can advocate for reducing the socioeconomic barriers facing students at Duke,
IN FORMATION
AMRITH RAMKUMAR, Sports Editor ABBY XIE, News Editor NEELESH MOORTHY, Managing Editor ADAM BEYER, Digital Content Director HAN KANG, Photography Editor JACKSON PRINCE, Editorial Page Editor SURABHI BERIWAL, Editorial Board Chair ASA ROYAL, Editorial Board Chair
CHRISSY BECK, General Manager FRANCES BEROSET, University News Department Head
KENRICK CAI, Local & National News Head
LIKHITHA BUTCHIREDDYGARI, Local & National News Head
VIR PATEL, Health & Science News Head
JIM LIU, News Photography Editor
IAN JAFFE, Sports Photography Editor
DILLON FERNANDO, Recess Editor
CHRISTY KUESEL, Recess Managing Editor
AUSTIN PEER, Recess Photography Editor SAM TURKEN Sports Managing Editor CAROLYN SUN, Graphic Design Editor RACHEL CHASON, Towerview Editor RACHEL CHASON, Recruitment Chair
SAMEER PANDHARE, Sports Managing Editor ADDISON MERRYMAN, Editorial Page Managing Editor GAUTAM HATHI, Towerview Editor CAROLYN CHANG, Towerview Photography Editor AMRITH RAMKUMAR, Recruitment Chair
SARAH KERMAN, Senior News Reporter
HEATHER ZHOU, Senior News Reporter
SAMANTHA NEAL, Senior News Reporter
BRE BRADHAM, Senior News Reporter
JOYCE ER, Senior News Reporter
MEGAN HAVEN, Advertising Director
JULIE MOORE, Creative Director The Chronicle is published by the Duke Student Publishing Company, Inc., a non-profit corporation independent of Duke University. The opinions expressed in this newspaper are not necessarily those of Duke University, its students, faculty, staff, administration or trustees. Unsigned editorials represent the majority view of the editorial board. Columns, letters and cartoons represent the views of the authors. To reach the Editorial Office at 301 Flowers Building, call 684-2663 or fax 684-4696. To reach the Business Office at 1517 Hull Avenue call 684-3811. To reach the Advertising Office at 2022 Campus Drive call 684-3811. One copy per person; additional copies may be purchased for .25 at The Chronicle Business office at the address above. @ 2017 Duke Student Publishing Company
networks can influence a hiring decision. The list goes on but the point remains. The divide between students from different socioeconomic classes can be overt such as with hiring practices, but it can also be revealed subtly— from cautious budgeting contrasted to nonchalant spending, to local versus exotic options for spring break trips, and the mere clothing on one’s back. On the colder days of winter, it is not hard to spot someone wearing a Canada Goose coat on campus. These jackets, some of which cost upwards of one thousand dollars, offer remarkably durable quality and are protected by lifetime warranties. Their owners, rightfully entitled to pursue their pragmatic, fashionable investment, are a sure minority on campus. However, their presence is a testimony to the remarkable breadth of backgrounds represented at Duke. But clothing is not the only factor indicating difference in socioeconomic class at Duke. In the Class of 2019 alone, 23 percent of students attended a private secondary school. Globally, the percentage of enrollment in private secondary education has been gradually increasing, but Duke bears a stark contrast to the national statistic of 10 percent. Importantly, socioeconomic diversity does not place an institution of higher learning one step ahead. It simply means equalizing the ground on which
regardless of background. On a personable level, individuals have the obligation to become informed and cognizant of their unique socio-economic privileges before large scale transformations—like vouchers for students staying on campus during prolonged breaks—come into play. Otherwise, DukeEngage participants will continue to make insensitive declarations on “how cheap everything is” in the developing countries where they spend their summers. Their remarks, insensitive to the unique privileges their stipends offer relative to the earnings of many locals, will parallel social discourse back on campus concerning what activities are trending, fun and “affordable.” A valuable question can be posed for everyone from the Cartier diamond necklace-wearer to the thrift-shopping jean-hunter: how affordable is my affordable? For the latter, you would be surprised to reflect on the value of those pants in other parts of the country. And for the former, Cartier jewelry and other luxuries are called luxuries for a reason. Remain mindful when speaking about money and challenge the predispositions that beget crass remark. Sabriyya Pate is a Trinity sophomore. Her column, “in formation,” runs on alternate Mondays.