The M ilton Paper Election Issue OCTOBER 14, 2016
MILTON’S INDEPENDENT WEEKLY STUDENT NEWSPAPER
VOL. 34, NO. 05
Trump and The First Chapter of a Bleak Future Rape Culture By NATASHA ROY
In the midst of an already outrageous election cycle, the country was shaken on Friday, October 7th, when a tape surfaced in which GOP candidate Donald Trump made predatory comments about women and how he seemingly, and somewhat proudly, sexually harassed them. Not only does this tape make Trump’s character seem questionable and untrustworthy, but it also highlights how he supports and perpetuates an existing rape culture. In the second Presidential Debate last Sunday, just two days after the tape was released, Trump was asked about this tape where he described, as specified by moderator Anderson Cooper, “kissing women without their consent, grabbing their genitals... [which] is sexual assault”. In response, Trump feebly conceded that he “[is] not proud of it,” before repeatedly asserting that it was only “locker room talk” and then deflecting to the topic of ISIS. By diminishing his sexual assault allegations, Trump is telling the world that he thinks sexual assault is not a serious or pertinent enough issue to be discussed at length. When we brush aside the fact that sexual assault is a real, horrifying issue, we breed a culture of rape. This is a culture in which sexual assault victims feel as though their experiences are so trivialized they are not to be spoken out against. A culture in which assailants are nurtured by a society that implies sexual assault isn’t a detestable crime. Perhaps even more harmful is the ‘boys will be boys’ mentality evident in Trump’s assertion that this tape consists merely of “locker room talk”. Trump, and the many others defending him, is thus suggesting that joking about sexual assault is excusable in a casual environment. It is such a mentality that normalizes sexual assault as a part of everyday life; so harmless that it can be present in informal jokes. Normalizing assault teaches us as a society that sexual assault is unavoidable and even excusable. In a cruel world in which sexual
CONTINUED ON PAGE 4
ABCNEWS.COM`
By MALCOLM MCCANN After the Democratic and Republican summer conventions, the 2016 election has had absolutely no virtue. America has entered a political depression. I have heard no enthusiasm about the next four years. Of the people I know, no one is particularly animated for a Clinton presidency and everyone is terrified of a Trump presidency. I share this sentiment, but I worry everyone is viewing this election in an incredibly myopic fashion, focusing only on the election and not the future. Both candidates are severely flawed. Irrefutably, Hillary Clinton is not transparent. She tends to lie to and mislead the general public. She is beholden to special interests. After her Wall St. speeches were leaked, where she said she holds “both a public and a private position” on issues, I personally do not believe she has any conviction. Clinton is also painfully uninspiring. For the first time in our history we could have a woman as president, yet I see no outward excitement in our school or in the general population. If you asked me why Hillary Clinton is running for president I would tell you it is because she is hungry for power, not because she wants to make the world better, and regardless of whether this is true or false; she has failed to create a movement behind herself. If there is a vastly low voter turnout I would not be surprised. In these ways, Hillary Clinton is a poor candidate. If she were running against a centrist with good judgement and suitable social views, I, a radical leftist, would easily
move center. Yet, I still support her because in my world view Donald Trump is an evil person. He is morally corrupt, a sociopathic megalomaniac who uses fear and hate to drive his campaign. Donald Trump is a symbol of mainstream sexism, racism, xenophobia, and islamophobia. I could walk you through how I came to that conclusion but I am going to save my energy. We simply cannot have someone in the oval office who admits to sexual assault, will commit war crimes, and has the potential to start a nuclear war without knowing what it means to have a nuclear triad. Irony runs deep in this election. While Trump uses fear of minorities to bolster his views, Clinton uses the fear of Trump to bolster her views. There is a poetic beauty in this story. Most Democrats support Clinton because they say Trump is evil, and most Republicans support Trump because they say Clinton is evil. Both parties are so focused on their opponent’s malignant nature that they are blind to the deep flaws of their own candidate. If the second presidential debate is any indication, this election is not about policy; instead it has devolved into a discussion about which reprehensible aspects of one candidate is worse than the other. The result of this phenomenon is devastating. This election is not about making America better, it has become about not making America worse, a precursor to a grim future. I cannot predict who will win the election, but I can predict what will happen
CONTINUED ON PAGE 7
Inside This Issue TRUMP’S SEXISM page 3
BALLOT QUESTIONS page 4
THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT page 6
TRUMP’S POLITICAL CORRECTNESS page 7
PAGE 2
The Milton Paper The 34th Editorial Board Editors-in-Chief Managing Editor Editor at Large Opinion Manager News Managers Senior Editors A&E Editor Rachel Handler Opinion Editor Gabrielle Fernandopulle
Malcolm McCann and Eli Burnes Letitia Chan Cheyenne Porcher Mateen Tabatabaei Marshall Sloane and Henry Westerman
Chloe Kim and Henry Burnes Layout Editor Jack Daley Photo Editor Caroline Massey
Faculty Sponsor Lisa Baker
Cartoonist Lilly Le
Sports Editor Peter Digiovanni Associate Editors Navpreet Sekhon Jonah Garnick Nihal Raman Website Manager Alex Iansiti
News
Opinion
Abby Walker Alexandra Millard Allison Reed Elina Thadhani Ellie Lachenauer Evita Thadhani Lyndsey Mugford Jack Sloane Juliana Viola Sarah Alkhafaji Will Torous Jimmy Delano
Barbara McDuffee Celena Eccleston Elaine Wu Jerome Vainisi Michelle Erdensanaa Molly Wilson Natasha Roy Noah Cheng Rachel Ding Serena Fernandopulle Vivian Soong Willa DuBois William Kim Jack Weiler
A&E Aditya Gandhi Emma Comrie Emma James Katie Friis Lydia Hill Olivia Zhong Sarah Miller-Bartley Columnists Michelle erdensanaa Tyler Piazza Semi Oloko
Humor Sophia Wilson-Pelton Lydia Hill Zack Herman Nick Govindan Sports Chris Mathews Liam Kennedy Sarah Willwerth Sophia Li Theo Miailhe
Milton’s Independent Weekly Student Newspaper “A Forum for Discussion and Thought” Founded 1979 • Publishing Weekly Since 1983 Founders David Roth • Mark Denneen The Milton Paper is an independent, student-produced publication. It does not necessarily represent the views of the students, faculty, administration, or Milton Academy itself. Please do not copy or reproduce without permission. Letters Policy: The Milton Paper gladly accepts letters from anyone who sends them. We do not promise to publish any or all letters, and we retain the rights to edit letters for content, length, and clarity. We will not publish anonymous letters. If inclined, please take the opportunity to write to us. Send letters by mail (Letters to the Editor, The Milton Paper, Milton Academy, 170 Centre Street, Milton, MA 02186), by email (TheMiltonPaper34@gmail.com), or by personal delivery to our office Warren 304.
Editorial
Stir the Pot
The upcoming election matters. Our futures will be decided when America elects either Donald Trump, a foolish demagogue wholly unqualified to be even a Milton class rep, or Hillary Clinton, an experienced yet flawed politician. The Editorial Board ardently supports and endorses Hillary Clinton, a decision motivated by a general agreement with her policies and a distinct distaste for her opponent. Yet, the particulars of our reasoning are relatively inconsequential. After all, a small fraction of Milton students can actually vote in this election, and those that can will likely support Clinton. Instead, we decided to focus on a way all students can participate in democracy: discussion and disruption. Political involvement is imperative, and, too often, Milton Academy does not encourage this essential civic duty. Voting represents one of the most important ways to participate in the American political process. If you’ve learned nothing else from your history courses here, you must remember that people have died to secure every American’s suffrage. All of those that are of age should vote, and Milton should help accommodate its students and faculty’s voting by assigning no homework on election night. Failing to do so implicitly encourages a lack of interest in our political system: how can one follow the polls and await an election result under the typical burden of a Milton workload? Furthermore, Milton’s administration should organize a free and convenient system to transport people to the polls, and when the administration inevitably neglects this responsibility, Milton’s day student population should be open to assisting their immobile peers. Ineligibility to vote does not render one irrelevant in the upcoming election. In fact, America has a long and rich history of under-age citizens contributing to the political process. On campaigns, many volunteers that assist with voter registration, canvassing, phone banking, and outreach are not able to vote. Furthermore, some of the most active contributors to the mid-20th century Civil Rights Movement were under-age high schoolers. Over the past few years, many of Milton Academy’s own students have participated in the Black Lives Matter movement and other protest groups. Consensus with youth activists is irrelevant; everyone should commend these citizens for not letting age restrict their allegiance to America’s political process. Discourse represents the best way to engage all. Full global or national awareness is not obligatory in a simple discussion. The bare essentials of a political dialogue is a knowledge of what is right and what is wrong. All too often, we shy away from this discourse because of a fear of conflict or embarrassment. This fear seems perfectly logical and normal, particularly in a high school environment, but students are not as petty as we think. A political disagreement will not erode one’s reputation. Having a discussion with someone and reading a few news articles is not an arduous task. Ultimately, there is no excuse for completely disengaging from this election cycle. Some of the conversations we have will be controversial and will spawn conflict, but we cannot let an overwhelming obsession with civil, politically correct discourse cease all discussions. Temporary discomfort in the wake of conflict is a small price to pay when the alternative is eternal censorship of unpopular opinions. People will tell you not to stir the “political pot” because of a fear of division. Ignore them. In the coming weeks, stir the pot. Furiously. Our future depends on it. •
Opinion
Trump’s Sexism
PAGE 3
Clinton’s Deplorable Comment By MARSHALL SLOANE
COURTESY OF CNN.COM
By LETITIA CHAN Trump is the epitome of the misogynist who sees women as nothing more than sex objects, so it struck no one by surprise, but as a predictably blasphemous climax, when the tape in which Donald Trump makes vulgar comments about women surfaced a week ago. In the tape from 2005, Trump is heard saying, “I just start kissing them. Just kiss--I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it,” as well as his most frequently quoted phrase from the tape, “Grab them by the pussy.” Trump’s recently exposed records of crude, misogynistic remarks and suggestions of assaulting women are hardly revelatory; his former wife Ivana Trump described in a divorce deposition an incident in 1989 in which he had “raped” her and she had clearly felt violated. Trump has also, over the years, expressed sexual attraction toward minors, including the then twelve years old Paris Hilton, sexualized his own daughter Ivanka, citing her “voluptuousness” and how he’d date her if he weren’t her father, and revealed that he recruits female employees and entertains female reporters based on their attractiveness. So it was laughably insufficient and inviting of mockery when Trump said at the second presidential debate, “Nobody has more respect for women than I do”--the phrase itself implies that women are not to be respected in the first place--and insisted that what he said was “locker room talk”. Trump’s behavior at this second debate was nothing short of what we’d expect from him: all throughout Hillary’s responses, he prowled around the stage like a predator and stood extremely close behind her, stated repeatedly that she should be “ashamed of herself”, and interrupted her repeatedly, and threatened to put her in jail. It’s ironic and timely that we should have a woman climb so far up in American politics for the first time,
while on the other hand we should have a male presidential nominee so blatantly sexist that his words are condemned by his own wife, Melania, and his cover-ups are so tragically see-through they cannot, even for a second, be plausible. At the overwhelming backlash, Trump was pressed to release a public video of his apology. Trump tried to turn the topic of his mistake as recorded in the tape, after a short statement of “nobody’s perfect” and a promise that what he said does not represent who he is now, to the impending, “important issues we’re facing today”. The fact that he issued an apology itself seems surprising, but it tells us nothing that we do not know about him other than the direness of his situation and the utter lack of remorse on his part. The very manner in which he makes up for his mistake, which he is sorry for only because of its consequences, makes abundantly clear his lack of respect for women. President Obama has said, “You don’t have to be a husband or a father to hear what we heard just a few days ago and say ‘that’s not right.’ You just have to be a decent human being to say that’s not right.” It requires only a basic morality to understand the wrongness in demeaning and objectifying women. Treating a woman with respect because you have a mother, wife, daughter, sister, etc. as an argument is itself invalid and sexist; this matter is about treating people with the most fundamental kind of respect. What is astounding is how Trump’s sexism, his racism and lies and lack of expertise, has not stopped him from getting as far as he has. Although the majority of the women’s vote lies with Clinton, the majority of the men’s lies with Trump. This mirrors the same male-female distribution of votes that Obama, who held majority of the women’s votes, held vs. Romney, who held majority of white
CONTINUED ON PAGE 6
I despise every single fiber of Donald Trump’s being. His policies lack common sense. His behavior does not abide by common decency. His morals seem inherently repulsive. So, how did America get here? We can easily accredit Trump’s rise to a series of uncontrollable factors like fleeting manufacturing jobs and changes in global power dynamics. However, saying that Trump’s rise was out of our control does America a disservice. Every American needs to be held accountable for Trump’s presidential prospects, and every American needs to work to prevent another inexperienced demagogue from rising up the ranks of America’s Grand Old Party. The first step must be to reduce political polarization. If we are truly interested in a cohesive body politic, real discourse must occur, and tactics like name calling or abrasive rhetoric undermine this effort. Thus, Hillary Clinton, by branding half of Trump supporters as a band of irredeemable deplorables, did not solve the problem at all. In fact, Clinton’s rhetoric worsened the issues that enabled Trump’s rise in the first place. As is often the case, Hillary Clinton’s comments have been greatly exaggerated and incredibly misunderstood. For the sake of clarity and context, below is Hillary Clinton’s full quote from the fundraiser- as reported by the Los Angeles Times: “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America. But the other basket...are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change...They don’t buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different...Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.” Clinton’s quote does have merit. Some Trump supporters are repulsive, white supremacists that subscribe to principles which have no place in 21st century America. The
CONTINUED ON PAGE 5
Ballot Question Overview
PAGE 4
Question 2
“The question, if approved, would let state education officials approve up to 12 new charter schools a year.”
Question 1
COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA
“A “yes” vote would allow a second slots parlor to exist in Massachusetts. The 2011 gambling law currently allows for up to three resort casinos and one slots parlor. The slots parlor license is owned by Penn National Gaming, which operates Plainridge Park Casino in Plainville.” The additional slots parlor license would go to a business connected to a horse racing facility, and the target location is Suffolk Downs. Three previous attempts to establish a casino at Suffolk Downs have failed. Only one casino--the slots parlor--currently exists in Massachusetts, but there could be five by 2019.
Why yes:
• Gambling can have positive economic impacts: look at Las Vegas. Gambling can bring in money from outside the local area • This slots parlor would invest money in horse racing and contribute to local communities • Massachusetts residents go to out-of-state casinos, an additional slots parlor in Massachusetts could keep some of that money here. • People should be allowed to spend their money how they choose. Slots parlors should not be restricted
Why no:
• Gambling does not lead to a productive exchange of goods, hurting the economy. • Gambling takes advantage of disadvantaged people and can lead to addiction and financial loss • Only one casino currently exists in Massachusetts, but there will be five by 2019. We should not approve another casino without first seeing the impact of the original casinos. • New England may already have more casinos than the market wants
Rape Culture CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 assault is rampant, in the workplace, on college campuses, and even in politics, it is our responsibility to take a stand to combat rape culture in every way we can. The only way to do so is by refusing to stand idly by when sexual assault is so casually dismissed and normalized, as it has been over the past week. Ever since the tape surfaced, several politicians, many of them prominent Republicans
Currently, no more than 120 charter schools are allowed to operate in the state, and there are currently 78 charter schools. Priority for new charters would be given to schools in lower performing districts. The new law would go into effect on January 1, 2017. Charter schools are public schools run by a private organization.
Why yes:
Why no:
• Thousands of children are on waiting lists for charter schools, and lifting the cap could give these children the opportunity get off of the waiting list and attend a charter school. • Having more charter schools would force traditional charter schools to compete, making all schools better. • Parents have the right to school choice, and more charter schools promotes school choice. • Boston charter schools haveshownbiggainsinstudenttest scores
• Charter school are funded by the state based on the number of students they enroll. Many argue that this money takes away from money that would have been spent on traditional public schools. • Low performing public schools could lose talented students to higher performing charter schools leading to a “brain drain.” • Though urban charter schools increase academic performance, suburban schools have been shown to decreases academic
Eli’s Votes: No on 1 Yes on 2 Yes on 3 Yes on 4
and/or Trump supporters (including Trump’s very running mate, Mike Pence) have denounced Trump’s apparent, completely shameful attitude and behavior towards women. Some, however, continue to stand by Trump through this scandal and make excuses for his behavior. Either growing up in a pervasive rape culture allows them to see no wrong in his comments, or they are trying to salvage Trump’s campaign in support of his policies or out of fear of electing Hillary Clinton. Yet this issue goes beyond the 2016 election, beyond politics itself. When we
make excuses for a man who is possibly a sexual assailant, or at the very least someone who condones and even glorifies sexual assault, we fuel the pernicious rape culture that plagues us all. It is wrong to let your support for Trump’s policies or your hate for Clinton blind side you in the wake of an issue so potentially detrimental to our society. Now, more than ever, we must assume our responsibility as thoughtful, moral citizens and take a stand against the omnipresent rape culture we see each day. •
By Marshall Sloane & Eli Burnes
PAGE 5
Question 3
“This question, if approved, would phase out what advocates say are “extreme” methods of farm animal confinement.” The law would ban any farm owner from keeping a breeding pig, calf, or egg-laying hen in a place where the animal cannot lie down, stand up, fully extend its limbs or turn around freely. Businesses cannot sell eggs or uncooked veal and pork if the farmer confined the animals in ways prohibited by this measure. Several exemptions exist to account for transport, medical research, and other situations. There is a $1,000 penalty for each violation.
Why yes: • Animal welfare is improved. • Farming practices already exist that allow for animal welfare to be balanced with the economic difficulties associated with industrial farming, this proposal would force all farms to adopt these successful practices.
• Cage-free eggs would become cheaper.
Why no: • The cost of non cagefree eggs and pork would grow, adversely impacting taxpayer funded programs and poor families. • The health of farm animals and their caretakers could be at risk. • Good farming practices do not align with the rules laid out in the ballot questions.
Marshall’s Votes: Yes on 1 Yes on 2 No on 3 Yes on 4 Depolorables CONTINUED FROM PAGE 3 Economist reported that Stephen Bannon, one of Trump’s lead campaign staffers, has admitted to supporting the Alt-Right, white supremacists from his propaganda website Breitbart “News.” The Economist continued, “Because of Mr Trump, the Alt-Right thinks it is on the verge of entering American politics as an equal-terms participant. ‘He is a bulldozer who is destroying our
COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA
Question 4
“If voters say “yes,” Massachusetts will join Colorado, Alaska, Oregon, Washington state and District of Columbia in legalizing marijuana for recreational use.” Individuals 21 years of old and older would be able to use, grow, and possess marijuana. People could possess under ten ounces inside their home and under one ounce in public, and they can grow up to six marijuana plants in their homes. The Cannabis Control Commission would be responsible for regulating the marijuana industry and issuing licenses to marijuana sellers. Retail marijuana sellers would be subjected to a state sales tax, 3.75% excise tax, and an optional 2% municipality tax. Some of the tax revenue would be appropriated to the
Why yes:
Why no:
• Legalizing marijuana could allow the purchase of marijuana to be taxed, a source of potential revenue. Colorado has netted $135 million in taxes and fees. • Legalizing marijuana could reduce criminal activity that correlates to illegal drug trade. • Police departments could no longer spend money addressing illegal marijuana trade, these funds could be spent on more essential and beneficial programs. • Regulated marijuana could be safer and more controlled. • Violent drug cartels could no longer gain massive revenue from the American marijuana market.
• The marijuana industry could prioritize profits over public health. • Children could gain access to the marijuana. • The tax revenue may not support the increased costs associated with the law. • Legalized marijuana could worsen the opioid epidemic.
traditional enemy’... Mr. Trump may not be Alt-Right himself, but ‘he doesn’t have to be to advance [the] cause.’” Additionally, Trump has tweeted caricatures of Pepe the Frog, a meme that has been co-opted by white supremacists As Clinton made clear, many Donald Trump supporters are still normal American voters that may have deeply flawed political leanings but do not necessarily align with the most extreme factions of the Trump coalition. The main takeaway should be that Trump supporters, like any
Hi Kenneth Bone!
demographic or group, are not a monolith and should not be defined by broad-stroke generalizations that overlook the real concerns which lead to the Trump voter’s stances. The second part of Hillary Clinton’s statement alludes to the complexities of the Trump coalition, yet, by framing half of his supporters as unworthy, Clinton only further divided the voters. Every Trump voter will now wonder if Hillary Clinton regards them as one of the deplorables.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 6
PAGE 6
Opinion
The Demise of the Christian Right By HENRY WESTERMAN For the past couple election cycles, there’s been a lot of media coverage on “the religious right” or “Christian right”, a large and relatively new subgroup of conservative voters known especially for their zealous support of socially conservative stances on issues such as abortion and LGBT Rights. The group has been a notable force since the late 1970s, when influential pastors in the midwest began to preach involvement in politics to their followers as a way to counter the growing progressive ‘attacks’ on society at the time, using the pulpit as a medium for advocating conservative issues. As the movement gained support, mostly in the Midwest and South and in recent years largely as a part of the Tea Party movement, the Republican party began to absorb some of their stances, moving the party further and further right to the point where it is today. Notable current leaders of the movement include Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz, though these days practically every Republican leader has to adhere at least somewhat to the positions of this group in order to stay in office. Donald Trump, as a result, is no different. Since Day 1 of his campaign, Trump has worked to seduce Christian conservatives to join his movement and, for the most part, has been successful. Despite Trump’s two divorces, his shifts on key socially conservative stances, and other negative aspects of his character in the eyes of Christian conservatives, in key Bible Belt states (meaning traditionally conservative and religious states in the south and southeast), Trump defeated even evangelical favorite Ted Cruz to claim the Republican nomination during the primaries. To many of Trump’s religious supporters, the reason to vote for him isn’t the positivity his values, but the sheer evil of his opponent, Hillary Clinton; others hope that a President Trump could at the very least put a conservative on the Supreme Court, who would be able to restore social conservatism’s control following several embarrassing defeats during Obama’s tenure. But, as some in the Christian Right movement have realized, Trump doesn’t really support the values they stand for. Sure, Trump says he shares a stance with conservative Christians on abortion; sure, Trump would probably select a conservative judge for the Supreme Court. But, very few other positives for
the movement can be drawn from a potential Trump victory. As conservative Christian blogger Rod Dreher wrote, “Neither one would be for the common good, in my judgment, but Trump’s thin skin and lack of principle rattles me to the core as a conservative. … But hey, religious conservative, understand this: whether you vote for Trump or not, you had better get it straight in your mind that it’s over for us in mainstream politics.” He has a point. If Trump wins, the country as we know it today will completely change; likely, the growth of what Dreher calls the “New Populist Nationalism” movement surrounding Trump will push Christian voices out of the conservative picture. If Hillary wins, things will likely continue in the direction they have been, advancing a secular liberal agenda that will include easier access to abortion and LGBT rights. Thus, most, including Dreher, see no other option but to vote for Trump, even if it means an end of their movement, given the threat of a Hillary victory. I am in no way a member of the Christian Right. However, I am religious, and several members of my family have attempted to convince me and members of my family that we need to vote Republican if we want to defend Christianity in our country from the dangers of liberalism which threaten to eliminate our values. I couldn’t disagree more. One candidate assumes ‘christian’ stances in an opportunistic manner while not even claiming to be churchgoing; the other has repeatedly referenced the importance of her Christian upbringing and faith throughout her public life. One candidate has on numerous occasions insulted people of other faiths, races, and opinions without seeking forgiveness; the other preaches a platform of acceptance for all Americans, advocating stances that benefit the poor and needy among us. From my perspective --though I support Hillary for other reasons-- if any voter wants to choose the more Christian candidate, they should be ‘with her’. Thus, I would say to any one of my Trump touting relatives, religious people should, as Ted Cruz once said, vote their conscience this election. Don’t be tied to party lines, or a stance on a single issue. Instead, look at the bigger picture, of what sort of country each candidate wants to promote. Listening to the messages of each candidate, the choice should be clear. •
Sexism CONTINUED FROM PAGE 3 men’s, eight years ago, according to PBS. Women who do support Trump believe with all their hearts that “he treats them as equals, he treats them with respect, he has them in high-paying jobs”--this quote taken from the mouth of Monica Deon, an Oklahoma delegate, in USA Today. Since the release of the tape, many Republicans have withdrawn their support, including Gov. Gary Herbert and Representative Jason Chaffetz, whose vote had previously been for Trump, while others have called Trump to step down voluntarily. Yet despite the brutal vulgarity of the Republican nominee and the repercussions he now faces thanks to the extent of his sexism, his behavior reveals exactly how disheartening this presidential election has been from the start. Hillary Clinton, facing off Trump and victorious in the debates so far due to superior conscience, temperament and political instruction--albeit not difficult to achieve-has had to handle Trump’s tirades, sexist comments and rude interruptions as though he were an unreasonable child. Trump continues to stumble about defending his burst but ever-oversized ego. The mere spectacle of our Republican nominee, void of virtues and baseline respect, reinforces how far we must still go to enhance this country’s moral values and political state despite what we’d like to think. Though his misogyny may be one out of a thousand atrocities he has committed, we should, if for solely this reason, many others of which we have, spare ourselves the embarrassment of the misogynistic, should-be sex offender that is Trump, who is dangerously close to becoming president.•
Deplorables CONTINUED FROM PAGE 5 Clinton’s main objective should be to include Trump’s voters in the mainstream. Whether Americans like it or not, no great President has ever been an outsider with no political experience. The concerned civilian saving the day represents a fallacy that never will exist. Thus, all Americans need to feel comfortable and respected by the career bureaucrats. Fortunately, Clinton delivered a sincere apology for her statement, but, by the time of her statement, much of the damage had already been done. Clinton regularly quotes Michelle Obama’s statement: “When they go low, we go high.” Michelle Obama’s words represent an ideal we should all strive for. In the coming weeks, Clinton should truly take this principle to heart. If she overlooks the importance of unifying the country, Clinton will only allow another Trump to emerge.•
Opinion
Trump’s Empathy, Not Political Correctness, is Under Question
COURTESY OF GOOGLE IMAGES
By MATEEN TABATABEI Since its inception, Donald Trump’s campaign has been marked by brazen, crude statements that even fellow Republicans know better than to say out loud. Denouncing political correctness has almost become a mantra of Trump’s, as commonly harped upon as The Great Wall of Our Southern Border. Trump abuses freedom of speech to say what he wants with little regard for its implications, and what are you left with? Sound bites about the Mexicans being killers and rapists, China or Russia being the driving forces of problems our nation faces such as global warming and a so-called mess of an economy, suspected terrorists’ families being viable targets for drone strikes, and “the African-Americans” primarily living in broken, crime-ridden, hellish neighborhoods. These statements display an utter failure to meet the standard for what is acceptable for politicians—or anybody else—to say in a public sphere. Political correctness, however, is not the only thing many of Trump’s statements lack: they also fail to convey any empathy altogether. Political correctness is often maligned, and perhaps, not without good reason: when the PC-left turns to liberal ideas to form the basis for what is acceptable or not acceptable, the result becomes intolerance for thoughts and statements which don’t meet that standard. Whether rooted in liberal or conservative ideology, intolerance is intolerance. At this point, the term political correctness has become tainted, its reputation stained by the mark of the same obnoxious extremes which have also stained its infamous byproducts, such as the “trigger warning” and “safe-space.” When the extreme cases of political correctness as a regressive shackle on free thought receive the most attention, people regard all political correctness as backwards and restricting. Trump has taken advantage of this phenomenon to give his supporters a breath of fresh air, voicing opinions they’ve long held but never seen a politician outwardly embrace, because to do
so would have been (rightfully) regarded as sexist, or racist, or xenophobic, and altogether not politically correct, but instead a likely act of political suicide. In an article published last year for the Paper, I argued that political correctness can easily become a superficial facade, a mask which, when worn and spoken through, hides beneath it the intolerance, bigotry, and ignorance which necessitate it in the first place. As I said then, although a well intentioned construct, political correctness all too often binds us to surface issues of how we say or do things, rather than the underlying issues of why certain beliefs and actions ought to be abandoned. This stance is one I still stand by, and the basis for why I think Trump’s inflammatory statements are more than a sign of a brave strike against political correctness. Sure, it is Trump’s lack of political correctness and disregard for the standard of decency the politician is held to in public that allows him to say what he does, making a farce of the American political system in the process. That Trump doesn’t “limit” himself to the politically correct goes without saying. Far more consequential is that his statements reveal a total ignorance and lack of empathy towards Mexicans, African-Americans, Muslims, and women, as well as a vile and immature character wholly unfit to govern our country. That’s the real, underlying problem: the bigotry and fear mongering Trump espouses. Justifying these statements with political correctness alone is simply misleading. Only in the absence of political correctness has Trump been able to reveal the demagoguery and bigotry which make him unfit for president for anyone not strictly white, male, and ignorant. With every Trump rally, he has brought to the light the “deplorables” of the Republican voting pool, exposing the toxicity, bigotry, xenophobia, sexism, and vileness of many GOP voters. Therefore, I salute Trump for his so-called lack of political correctness. As long as he isn’t actually elected, that is. •
PAGE 7
Our Future CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 thereafter, regardless of which candidate is in control. The United States will be more divided, more polarized, than it was before. Half of Americans will believe their president is a criminal. Half of Americans will not trust their president. Half of Americans will hate their president. It has been over six years since our last recession, and we will have another recession in the next four years with a president that half of Americans do not trust– this is seriously problematic. The next administration will be the opposite of transparent and will suppress the rights of journalists. Considering the interventionist beliefs of both candidates, the United States will probably go to war in the next four years. Considering the economic policies of both candidates, the United State’s debt problem will likely not be solved. The implications of this election span much farther than these next four years. The increasing polarization in this country have left Democrats and Republicans with only one option on the ballot. The side effects of our two party system will inherently continue to become worse as the two parties become more and more extreme. In the quest for a party nomination, 16 million people voted for Clinton and 14 million for Donald Trump in their respective primaries. Less than 10% of the US population narrowed down the search for the next president to two individuals. It’s clear why we are choosing between the lesser of two evils. I am also afraid the candidacies of both Trump and Clinton have set the bar extremely low in the future. The ideal candidate is someone who always tells the truth, shows compassion and patriotism, shows dedication to the American people, and wants to be president for the greater good, not out of a craving for personal power. The ideal candidate is knowledgeable in all topics, an intellectual who understands the needs of the rich and poor. Democrats have shown they are content with candidates who are untrustworthy and beholden to special interests. Republicans have shown they approve candidates who are blatantly discriminatory and completely unintelligent. Yet, in a sense, this has always been true. Maybe this election is the point in our history when we realized that the modern day politician has been wearing a mask for the past 20 years, and what we have seen underneath is abhorrent. If I were an optimist I would tell you that Americans will learn the consequences of their dereliction of their duties during the primary stage and the deviation from the ideal candidate after a bleak four years, but I am afraid that by that time we will have forgotten the grave predicament we are in today. •
PAGE 8
Ad Nauseam The Election: A Timeline
October 16th: Gary Johnson referred to as “Larry” by interviewer. No one corrects him. New name sticks. October 19th: Trump trips on stairs while walking up to debate stage, lizard tail rips through dress pants. October 24th: In an attempt to mix up her look, Hillary wears a “funky” hat on a trip to the store. Drops 17 points in the polls. October 25th: Hillary texts Obama the following: “sup homie — lookin 2 perfect ur swagger and urban likability. Txt back w/ tips n tricks.” Barry hits Hil with the read receipt. October 29th: Jill Stein sticks to anti-vaccination stance in rally speech. October 30th: Jill Stein quarantined for polio. November 3rd: At rally in Incest, Pennsylvania, Trump recites MLK’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech word for word. Sends out press release, saying “It’s locker room talk… I’ll take accountability for stealing once Baruch Atah Osama shows us his birth certificate.” November 5th: Gary Johnson reportedly called “cool dad” by teenage daughter’s boyfriend, decides he can drop out of race now. November 8th: President Kenneth Bone is elected via write-in. November 9th: Trump takes off makeup, is Putin. November 9th: Ted Cruz takes off makeup, is the Zodiac
Reminder: voter registration deadline is October 19th Printed on 50% post-consumer waste. Please recycle this paper. www . themiltonpaper . org