Indiana Daily Student
4
OPINION
Monday, Feb 27, 2017 idsnews.com
LUCAS LETS LOOSE
Editors Dylan Moore and Zack Chambers opinion@idsnews.com
EDITORIAL BOARD
Globalization harms Latin American countries By the time this article runs I will be in the air on a flight toward Buenos Aires to study abroad through the School for International Training. I will finally be ditching the relentless Orwellian propaganda operation that has become United States politics. This may come as a shock, but there indeed exists a vibrant planet outside Trump television. In Argentina I will be immersed in a country that has a stunning political history: Spanish colonization, a struggle for industrialization, the famed leader Juan Perón, a violent dictatorship, to total economic collapse in 2001. However, Argentina struggles alongside other Latin American nations in a world consumed in the identity crisis of globalization. Since its economic collapse, Argentina has initiated democratic reform that would stun citizens of the U.S. After popular social movements triggered the government’s fall, a new national-popular government assimilated workerowned factories into the government, prosecuted human rights abusers from the military dictatorship and opposed U.S. foreign policy actions like the Iraq War. To understand how we found ourselves in a world of far-right know-nothings, extreme inequality and social decay, we need not go further than the recent history of globalization and particularly the passing of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Though forgotten, NAFTA was initially to be passed in secret during the 1992 U.S. presidential election, but public outcry protracted the legislative battle for more than a year. The long-term effects of NAFTA were well known then — simply look at the class-conscious New York
Lucas Robinson is a senior in English and political science.
Times articles from that period. However, our public discourse concerning NAFTA misses the crucial parts of its structural design. In 1992 the New York Times described a “Paradox of ‘92” in the U.S. economy, where low-growth coexisted alongside enormous record profits. Though it seems like a paradox, this is the traditional developing world economic model that exists in the U.S. and Europe to this day, and it’s the economic arrangement etched into stone by NAFTA. The consequences weren’t just wage stagnation and immigration. These trade deals have eroded democratic institutions because decision-making power has been transferred to private corporations and not a democratic state. This new phase of globalization is not singular to the Trump phenomena of the U.S. Around the world disaffected populations support right-wing strongmen, each of whom channels popular anger towards immigrants, drug dealers and foreign enemies, yet somehow ignore the system of capitalist globalization. There are striking commonalities among Trump, Vladimir Putin of Russia, Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, Shinzo Abe of Japan, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines, and Narendra Modi of India. The problems facing humanity don’t differ nation by nation, but if we continue to let the forces of reaction undermine our need to collectively organize, we will never remedy the great sickness at the heart of globalization. luwrobin@umail.iu.edu
NO HOT TAKES
Abortion debates should be based in science After spending only a short amount of time following the United States’ abortion debate, it’s easy to spot the supposed injuries that will grace a woman who chooses to abort a fetus. Prominent ideas include that having an abortion increases the risk of breast cancer, leads to death or induces irreparable trauma emotionally and psychologically. All of these are myths. Legislation backed by these unscientific ideas should be punishable at state and federal levels. Experts at the American Cancer Society find medical abortions are not linked to breast cancer. Research published in the peer-reviewed Obstetrics and Gynecology journal concludes mortality risks for carrying a pregnancy to term are higher than those from having an abortion. A cohort study from the Jornal of the American Medical Association Psychiatry finds the only psychological consequences related to abortion come from being denied access to one. Anti-abortion organizations have no such scientific research to present. These groups are the fuel for legislation attacking abortion rights. Some governments have already taken it upon themselves to halt the spread of ignorance among non-governmental groups. The French parliament approved a bill Feb. 16 that would punish websites fronting as government-affiliated groups that purposefully disseminate false information on abortion in the form of a €30,000 ($31,684.50) fine and up to two years in prison, according to the Washington Post. While the anti-abortion groups branded the bill as an attack on their freedom of speech, French minister for women’s rights Laurence Rossignol said anti-choice groups can continue to tout
Julia Bourkland is a sophomore in philosophy and political science.
their unscientific claims if they “sincerely say who they are, what they do and what they want.” By inciting a similar measure with a scientific standard, legislators sympathizing with such anti-choice groups wouldn’t be able to act under the façade of helping women with their bills. Their cause would become publicly noticed as unethical, laughable and explicitly misogynistic. Despite its importance, politicians constantly attack the right to abortion with vigor. What’s more, a scientific standard in legislative bodies seems unimaginable. If government officials can’t act like adults when it comes to global warming and climate change, there’s no reason to think they would be rational about abortion. This goal is lofty, but it’s necessary for uncovering anti-choice legislation for what it is: misogynistic. Just as politics did away with invoking social Darwinism when such evidence became known as obviously unscientific, it should handle abortion similarly. Abortion opposition is an insidious ramification of hatred, skepticism and distrust toward women. Its purpose is not to help women, but to revoke their bodily, reproductive and sexual autonomy. When it comes to the medical issue of abortion, legislators should only be able to act using information from peer-reviewed and credible scientific research. Without hiding behind false information, baseless arguments suggesting that women don’t have the right to make choices about their own bodies will be all that’s left. jsbourkl@umail.iu.edu
ILLUSTRATION BY KATIE MEIER | IDS
Jumping toward space travel We should take care of Earth before we extend to the stars According to NASA, humanity has seven new possibly livable planets to dream about inhabiting. Before you get your bag ready for an “Interstellar”like journey, the Editorial Board has something for you to consider. The space travel excitement is a little premature. Our current planet has larger problems to handle before we make plans to inhabit other worlds. Namely, we need to invest in curbing climate change to sustain life on Earth. First of all, NASA believes the system of planets may orbit a dwarf star that is 40 light years away. Because we cannot travel anywhere near the speed of light yet, that’s a little far-fetched for the Editorial Board. Forty light years roughly translates to 235 trillion miles, which would take us just over 11 thousand years to traverse with current technology.
Furthermore, NASA seems more focused on finding alien life than finding humans a new planet to inhabit. Thomas Zurbuchen, associate administrator of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate, said that “Answering the question ‘are we alone?’ is a top science priority” shortly after the exoplanets were found. This discovery reminds us on Earth that we are likely not alone or special. While this is all exciting, it’s kind of hard to be completely excited when you think about the state of our own planet. The Portland Press Herald reported that global warming is linked to the shrinkage of the Colorado River. With rising temperatures, precipitation is happening less and more states are experiencing drought. Yes, it is important to fund space travel and exploration,
but if we don’t first take care of the issues at hand, we will really need to leave Earth and find a new home. It’s hard to believe that President Trump is quick to fund and support NASA, which for all he knows could be making up its data, yet he won’t do the same for climate change — something most respected scientists agree on. We can applaud Trump for his ideas of expanding NASA’s scope. While campaigning last October, Trump said “I will free NASA from the restriction of serving primarily as a logistics agency for low earth orbit activity.” With this expansion, he hopes to create more jobs and further space exploration. This is great and all, but we wish he had the same sort of passion for things rooted on Earth. We want to be a likable species who takes care of its planet so that if aliens ever do make contact with us, they
won’t want to immediately vaporize us. In order to do that, we need to be mindful of the well-being of Earth, the wellbeing of each other, and the well-being of ourselves. Its crunch time on Earth and something needs to be done. Think about how much you have enjoyed the weather these past few weeks. Warm, sunny and clean air makes us all happier people, but at a cost. Remember that we’ve been enjoying this weather in the middle of February. Remember that on Valentine’s Day, a lot of us didn’t need love to warm us up when the weather was already in the 60s. Instead of looking at these seven planets as a backup plan, we should look at them as a goal in the distant future. We can hope to reach them one day, but we need to focus more on keeping our home planet healthy.
CONVERSATIONS WITH KATE
Hashtag campaign promotes body positivity When I first saw a headline about #disabledandcute, my mind flashed to Otto the cat, an internet sensation diagnosed with a feline form of Down syndrome. Like most cats, Otto is cute, but the captions on the viral photos are remarkably less cute and convey stale messages of inspiration such as “he’s no different than any other cat!” I figured #disabledandcute would offer a similar blanket message. However, my initial assumptions about #disabledandcute could not have proven more wrong. In reality, the social media campaign is an unapologetic celebration of body positivity for people with disabilities. The body positivity movement has long needed to be more inclusive, and this hashtag is a great example of the kind of inclusion that more body positivity campaigns should strive to embrace. The hashtag started with
Keah Brown, a 25-year old journalist with cerebral palsy. She posted photos with the hashtag as a celebration of her own body, and “cute” was her self-chosen descriptor. Since then, the trend has spread throughout the disability community. Instead of feeling pressure to crop their selfies in a particular way, people are free to include wheelchairs, prosthetics or paralyzed limbs in the frame if they so choose – a concept not commonly addressed in body positivity campaigns. A related phenomenon has transpired in the modeling industry over the past few years. There has been an increase in the number of models with disabilities, which drew particular attention at New York Fashion Week in 2016. Several prominent TV commercials have also featured kids with Down syndrome in the past year. Reports on this more inclusive modeling trend tend
toward inspirational, feelgood stories, which make these efforts a bit suspicious as a marketing tool. In many cases, companies seem to use the model’s disability, rather than the model themselves, as the advertising strategy. However, even if the rhetoric tends to be patronizing, the increased diversity in modeling also represents increased visibility in the industry. It not only marks the entrance of people with disabilities into this traditionally exclusive profession but also indicates changing attitudes, which can lead to more widespread changes in the long run. The campaign shows the importance of incorporating visible representations of disability in mainstream culture. The TV and film industries need to avoid selecting nondisabled actors to play disabled characters whenever possible just as the modeling industry needs to work toward not rejecting models
Kaitlynn Milvert is a senior in English.
solely on the basis of their disability. Brown, in an interview with Teen Vogue, critiqued “the caricatures that (people) see in movies and TV shows.” People don’t look the same or have the same self-image solely because they have related types of disabilities. The #disabledandcute campaign pushes against such archetypes, reinforcing the necessity of self-definition. As a result, anyone who participates in the campaign is free define themself as “cute,” as Brown chooses to, but no one has to be cute or adhere to any else’s definition of cuteness. This element of the campaign shows perhaps the most important part of an inclusive body positivity movement — the ability to choose one’s own self-image. kmilvert@umail.iu.edu
A NOTE FROM THE EDITORIAL BOARD The Editorial Board is made up of the Opinion section editors and columnists. Each editorial topic is selected and discussed by the Board until we reach a consensus, and a member of the board volunteers to write the article. The opinions expressed by the Editorial Board do not necessarily represent the opinions of the IDS news staff, student body, faculty or staff members or the Board of Trustees. SPRING 2017 EDITORIAL BOARD Dylan Moore, Zack Chambers, Kaitlynn Milvert, Miranda Garbaciak, Becca Dague, Neeta Patwari, Anna Groover, Maddy Klein, Emma Getz, Colin Dombrowski, Jessica Karl, Steven Reinoehl, Austin VanScoik, Julia Bourkland, Kathryn (Katie) Meier, Lucas Robinson, Sam Reynolds, Mercer Suppiger, Brian Gamache, Justin Sexton
LETTER TO THE EDITOR POLICY The IDS encourages and accepts letters to be printed daily from IU students, faculty and staff and the public. Letters should not exceed 500 words and may be edited for length and style. Submissions must include the person’s name, address and telephone number for verification. Letters without those requirements will not be considered
for publication. Letters can be mailed or dropped off at the IDS, 6011 E. Kirkwood Ave. Bloomington, IN 47405. Send submissions via e-mail to letters@idsnews.com. Call the IDS with questions at 855-0760.