October 2013

October 2013

Volume XXI, Issue 2

The Fenwick Review

The Independent Journal of Opinion at the College of the Holy Cross

The Fishbowl Fallacy A Lack of Lively Debate

Chase Padusniak ‘15 Staff Writer

Every discussion at Holy Cross seems to be a

fishbowl. Want to talk about abortion? Fishbowl. Want to discuss Syria? Fishbowl. Want to decide between Upper Kimball and Lower Kimball? Fishbowl. Now I’m not on campus at the moment and I can’t speak for the 2013-2104 academic year, but my two years of experience have left me wanting more. Why have they left me yearning for a greater experience? Well at the end of the day, fishbowls leave me drowning

X and Professor B says Y, then why should I care?

of the tried and true forms of academic debate.

Ostensibly, I should care because the

But the problem isn’t just boredom. We

topic is interesting. Fine. But what if I were to tell

also go to fishbowls to learn. And I don’t just mean

you that people go to fishbowls not just to learn,

like in a classroom. I’m talking about the wonderful

but to decide, to watch different sides face off

experience derived from a sincere dialogue between

in the academic equivalent of a football game?

two educated and informed individuals. Think the

Unfortunately, the fishbowl is not a format that

Platonic dialogues. Sometimes it’s the ability to read

lends itself to such decisive matches of wit and

between the lines (or in this case the words) that

skill. In fact, watching a fishbowl is a little bit like

makes a debate so enlightening. Questions, answers,

watching the Oakland Raiders play football: boring,

and the audience’s ability to react to those statements

meaningless, and ultimately without a winner.

become the primary method for learning in a debate.

See, we like football games because we like

Unfortunately, fishbowls tend to deny

competition. We enjoy debate for the same reason.

us this opportunity. Of course on the surface, a

And that is the problem. We have fishbowls Linguistic somersaults and academic tomfoolery in order to see topics discussed. We want to see are the basis for any enjoyable university gathering topics discussed because we are either undecided (on a weeknight). Fishbowls lack that competitive

fishbowl is all about questions and answers, but by

in a whole lot of disconnected information.

turning the discussion itself from a lively debate into a series of statements that are all over the place,

or because we want to disarm the opposition. The

edge. At the end of the day, they amount to a we’re denied a sincere dialectic. What can one really

problem is that fishbowls at Holy Cross end up

series of disjointed statements about a topic loosely learn from a series of tepid sentences connected

being quite dry. We talk and talk and that’s all well

united by a student moderator droning on and

by nothing more than a shared keyword or two?

and good, but what good is a series of disconnected occasionally making a joke about Kimball food. statements without real debate? If Professor A says To be frank, they are boring. They lack the flare

An American Satyricon

Dr. Victor Davis Hanson ~ Special Guest Contributor ..... pages 6-7

Continued on page 7

Like us on Facebook & follow us on Twitter @FenwickReview and read The Fenwick Review online at: http://college.holycross.edu/studentorgs/fenwickreview/index.html

The Fenwick Review

2

Mission Statement As the College of the Holy Cross’s independent journal of opinion, The Fenwick Review strives to promote intellectual freedom and progress on campus. The staff of The Fenwick Review takes pride in defending traditional Catholic principles and conservative ideas, and does its best to articulate thoughtful alternatives to the dominant campus ethos. Our staff desires to help make Holy Cross the best it can be by strengthening and renewing the College’s Catholic identity, as well as working with the College to encourage constructive dialogue and an open forum to foster new ideas.

To The Benefactors In this issue, as in every issue, we must reserve space to offer a heartfelt thank you to our benefactors, without whom The Fenwick Review would not exist. We extend our profound gratitude to The Collegiate Network and the generous individual and alumni donors to The Fenwick Review, for their ongoing enthusiasm and support of our mission. You are always in our prayers, and with each issue we publish, our first goal is to justify the incredible faith you have shown in us.

Mr. Guy C. Bosetti Dr. and Mrs. Paul Braunstein Mr. and Mrs. Michael Dailey Mr. and Mrs. Richard Fisher Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Gorman Mr. Robert W. Graham III Dr. and Mrs. Thomas W. Greene Mr. Paul M. Guyet Mr. Robert R. Henzler Mr. William Horan Mr. Joseph Kilmartin Mr. Robert J. Leary ‘49 Mr. Francis Marshall ‘48 Mr. J. O’Neill Duffy Mr. Kevin O’Scannlain Fr. Paul Scalia Dr. Ronald Safko Mr. Sean F. Sullivan Jr.

October 2013

Contents October 2013

Volume XXI, Issue 2

1 The Fishbowl Fallacy

Chase Padusniak ‘15

3 The Editor’s Desk

Andrew D. Emerson ‘14 & Patrick J. Horan ‘14

4 Letter To The Editor Chris Hodgens ‘17

4 Pro Monarchia, contra Ioannem

Response to “The British Monarchy” ~ Nikolas Churik ‘15

5 Are Pianos Allowed?

Steven Merola ‘16

6 An American Satyricon

Dr. Victor Davis Hanson ~ Special Guest Contributor

8 Al-Shabaab: A Threat to the US? John Castro ‘14

8 Citizenship of Senator Cruz Hayward Shine ‘16

10 Debt Crisis Brewing in China?

David Odell ‘14

11 On Christ and Capitalism

Patrick J. Horan ‘14 ~ Co-Editor in Chief

October 2013

The Fenwick Review

3

The Editor’s Desk

The Fenwick Review 2013-2014 Staff

Are We ‘Fishbowled’ Out?

Co-Editors in Chief

A regular, yet underwhelming, feature of the McFarland Center for Religion, Ethics, and Culture is the “fishbowl” series on contemporary issues. Although these fishbowls are intended to promote intellectual discourse and involve a number of esteemed professors on this campus, the outcomes are frequently less than interesting and ultimately unproductive. As discussed by Chase Padusniak ‘15 in this issue, the fault with fishbowls lies not with their organizers or their participants, but with their basic format. Padusniak argues that in order to better foster healthy dialogue among differing opinions the loose set-up of these events should be replaced with a more formal debate structure.

Emerson would issue a concurring opinion on the critique of the fishbowls, but would dissent in part.

Fundamental to the nature of the Ivory Tower is political bias. Particularly at northeastern liberal arts institutions, it is truly difficult, though not impossible, to find a diversity of opinions amongst the faculty. Holy Cross is no exception.

While some departments are more openminded in accepting divergent views, others are markedly defensive when confronted with challenges to their worldview. Therefore, finding a panel that fairly represents a multitude of opinions on a given issue is inherently problematic. This was demonstrated in the recent Snowden fishbowl, in which all of the participants, at least in principle, agreed that he was a patriotic whistleblower who deserved little to no punishment. While reserving judgment regarding the validity of this conclusion, the lack of proper debate and conflict was disappointing.

Overall, the problem lies in the execution, not the format.

Horan agrees in full with Padusniak’s analysis of this issue. The bias Emerson has pointed out is evident in the fishbowl series, but the format certainly does not lend itself to productive discussion. Each fishbowl inevitably involves numerous statements made by the “fish” that do not pertain to the matter at hand. The participants habitually use these forums to ramble, rather than fully flesh out the nuances of the subject material.

This one-sidedness is a recurring problem. In a fishbowl on the Occupy Wall Street movement in the fall of 2011, Professor David Schaefer (Political Science) was the only member, who seriously critiqued the left-wing cause, while Professors Mary Hobgood (Religious Studies), Joseph Lawrence (Philosophy), and Justin Svec (Economics) all sympathized with the movement and disparaged the relatively free-market system used in the United States (full-disclosure, Prof. Schaefer is this publication’s faculty moderator). In a 2012 event on affirmative action, Christopher Theobalt ‘13 was the only participant out of group of eight (including the moderator) who staunchly opposed the use of affirmative action in college admissions, while the rest either strongly supported affirmative action or were undecided, but still sympathetic.

The Fenwick Review requests that the McFarland Center reconsider both the format and execution of the fishbowl series. There is certainly room on this campus for vibrant political and social commentary on an array of stimulating topics, but the College is seriously falling short.

In lighter news, All Hallows’ Eve and the Feast of All Saints are upon us. We admonish our readers to have both fun and safe celebrations of the pagan harvest festival, the changing of the seasons, and the Christian holiday.

Live Free or Die, Andrew D. Emerson ‘14 & Patrick J. Horan ‘14

Andrew D. Emerson ‘14 Patrick J. Horan ‘14

Copy Editors John Castro ‘14 Kaylie Gage ‘14

Website Editor

Andrew D. Emerson ‘14

Layout Editor in-Absentia Claire S. Mahoney ‘15

Foreign Bureau Chief Nikolas Churik ‘15

Staff Writers

J. Alex Cicchitti ‘15 Ken Jordan ‘14 Eric Kuhn ‘16 Joseph Lepera ‘14 Mary Maliszewski ‘14 Steven Merola ‘16 David Odell ‘14 Chase Padusniak ‘15 Hayward Shine ‘16

Faculty Adviser

Professor David Lewis Schaefer Political Science

Disclaimers

This journal is published by students of the College of the Holy Cross and is produced two or three times per semester. The College of the Holy Cross is not responsible for its content. Articles do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board.

Donation Policy

The Fenwick Review is funded through a generous grant from the Collegiate Network as well as individual donations. The Fenwick Review is an organization incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We welcome any donation you might be able to give to support our cause! To do so, please write a check to: The College of the Holy Cross with The Fenwick Review in the memo line and mail to: Patrick J. Horan P.O. Box 4A 1 College Street Worcester, MA 01610

Letter Policy

We at The Fenwick Review encourage feedback. All comments, criticisms, compliments, and opinions are welcome. As we are striving to promote intellectual freedom and progress here at Holy Cross, opposing viewpoints to anything we print are especially appreciated. Finally, we reserve the rights to print and edit any letters for clarity and length that we receive.

Please email you submissions to: fenwickrev@g.holycross.edu

The Fenwick Review

4

October 2013

Letter To The Editor

To the Editors,

It is very important to expose ourselves to other cultures and their traditions; however, that

As a “first-year” student on Mount St. James, does not mean that we have to abandon the works of I have been trying to immerse myself in everything greats, such as Shakespeare and Aristotle, from “our Holy Cross. On Tuesday morning, I picked up a own” Western culture. I look forward to picking up copy of The Fenwick Review in Hogan. I am happy that my next copy of The Fenwick Review.

I picked up a copy especially because I thoroughly enjoyed the article on “Holy Cross and the Liberal All The Best, Arts” by Chase Padusniak. I agree with the author Chris Hodgens ‘17 that we often lose sight of the great “classics” of Western culture.

Thank you for the kind words! And thank you for being a voice in defense of tradition, particularly with regard to the liberal arts. Although we understand that change can be desirable in certain circumstances, we at The Fenwick Review seek to be constantly vigilant of changes that have the potential of eroding the principles upon which Holy Cross was founded.

Best Regards, Pat Horan ‘14 & Andrew Emerson ‘14

Pro Monarchia, contra Ioannem A Response to J. Alex Cicchitti’s “The British Monarchy”

Nikolas Churik ‘15 Foreign Bureau Chief “Zadok the Priest, and Nathan the Prophet anointed Solomon King. And all the people rejoic’d.” – Handel (adapted from 1 Kings 38-40) “God save the queen, the fascist regime.” – Sex Pistols

sonable that for a boy, who might someday ascend to the throne, it is a very good thing to celebrate his birth, in fashion as grand as his office. George has, nearly as much as anyone can, his future determined, and henceforth the eyes of the world will rest upon him. If the foibles of bonnie Prince Harry can serve as a guide, his actions will be scoured for mistakes by media ready to create a story. For the moment, the media have nothing with which to shame George and

It is not to be disputed that the news is filled therefore everything to celebrate. with frivolous reporting. Vapid stories are easy disIt is a curious thing to say that the royal famtractions. The article to which this piece responds

ily believes themselves “greater than others by birth-

conflates an argument about bad reporting in the

right.” Prince Charles voluntarily pays taxes in the

media with issues of the British monarchy. Although

same fashion as his future subjects. Bonnie Prince

neither by profession nor by association am I a mon-

Harry served as a tank commander. Prince William

archist, it seems that the British monarchy, in this

married a commoner. Can it really be said of this

case, deserves a defense.

royal house, “L’etat, c’est moi?” If, indeed, the royal

“It would seem reasonable that for a boy who might someday ascend to the throne, it is a very good thing to celebrate his birth in fashion as grand as his office.” some valuable social beyond their apparent surface.

G.W.F. Hegel suggested that constitutional The celebration of Prince George’s birth family believes itself to be “greater than others by possesses symbolic, if not substantial, importance. birthright,” its special nature was established by the monarchy is the most rational of political systems, The 20th century historian Barbara W. Tuchman re- English Parliament through the Act of Settlement of though Hegel does recognize that because the United marked, according to her eponymous law, “The fact 1701. From the Hanoverian George I, whose king- States was founded in a different historical context, of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of ship was established by the Parliament, there is a its most rational system would be different. It provides for a democratic process, while still maintainany deplorable development by five- to tenfold.” By nearly direct line down to his namesake successor.

To suggest that “a country [which] decrees

ing a supra-political individual who can represent the

suggested the media enhance the image of world that that a baby born via a royal uterus is more fit to repis solitary, nasty, brutish, and short. By focusing on resent the nation than all other citizens” is “brain-

state as it exists without factions. Without this indi-

concentrating on the evils of the world, Tuchman

so jubilant an occasion for such an extended period, the media, though surely unconsciously, counteract

vidual, Phillip Blond suggests the politicians of state

washed” seems a bit extreme. It also appears to be would be left to self-regulate, but this they cannot a misunderstanding of tradition. Traditions have do. The transcendent office of the monarchy, accord-

historical and cultural significance such that they are ing to Blond, has stopped democracy in Britain from meet a murderer or mugger. G.K. Chesterton, in his maintained and indeed “handed” down, even when being subverted and turned to tyranny. Rather than essay on birthdays, defends their celebration: “the they are, in some ways, anachronistic. This “irrelevant focus on the state, as such, individuals attend to their the law and suggest that one will not, on every corner,

first fact about the celebration of a birthday is that it

relic” is preserved precisely because it hearkens back

notion of what the state ought to be, and in so doing

is a way of affirming defiantly, and even flamboyantly,

to a time or event worth remembering. Symbols exist

ignore the factious nature of the contemporary poli-

that it is a good thing to be alive.” It would seem rea- and are maintained precisely because they possess

tics. God save the Queen, long may she reign.

5

Are Pianos Allowed?

Response to “Holy Cross and the Liberal Arts” Dear Chris,

The Fenwick Review

October 2013

A Reflection on Sacred Instrumental Music Steven Merola ‘16 Staff Writer It is certainly not uncommon to see pianos, guitars, and even entire bands to be employed during the mass. Many find the use of this music quite enjoyable, and rejoice in its “relevance”, as if the mass were made for human entertainment. Nevertheless, few stop to ponder whether or not such instruments are permitted for use in divine worship, or if they are capable of fulfilling the purpose of the mass, which is to worship God in His glory and majesty, and to grow closer to Him. Upon examination of the Church’s instructions on sacred music, and the nature of these instruments, it would seem that the answer to both of these questions is no.

The Church has consistently maintained her desire for only the most fitting instruments to be used during divine worship. Beginning with St. Pius X’s 1903 instruction on sacred music, Tra le Sollectudini, the organ was instituted as the instrument of choice for the liturgy, and the use of other instruments was strictly limited. Following in this vein, in 1958 the Sacred Congregation for Rites, under Pope Pius XII, released its instruction De musica sacra et sancta liturgia. Hearkening back to St. Pius X, the 1958 instruction stated that “the principal musical instrument for solemn liturgical ceremonies of the Latin Church has been and remains the classic pipe organ.”

With regard to other instruments, the instruction was again quite specific: “Musical instruments which by common acception, and use are suitable only for secular music must be entirely excluded from all liturgical functions[.]” Further, of those instruments permitted for use, those who played them were instructed to play “with such seriousness, and religious devotion that every suggestion of raucous secular music is avoided, and the devotion of the faithful is fostered[.]” It is clear, that over the span of about six decades, the Church was quite intent upon insuring that nothing be admitted into the liturgy which could distract from the great honor and reverence due to the majesty of God. Ah, but skeptics ask, what of Vatican II? Surely the Church did away with all these stuffy rules! In response to this putative objection, I offer the texts of the Second Vatican Council. In the Council’s 1963 Constitution on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum concilium, they affirm: “in the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high

esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things.” Take note of the language here; they draw attention to the organ’s traditional role in divine worship.

The writers of this document clearly had great respect for the Church’s musical tradition and the past instruction on the organ’s importance. Furthermore, the council document instructed that other instruments are to be allowed “only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.”

Again, this direction takes strongly from the 1958 instruction, which in turn drew upon the 1903 rule.

The strong continuity which exists between the Church’s various instructions on sacred music is quite evident: the pipe organ is to be given first place in instrumental sacred music, and all other instruments must be thoroughly non-secular. The Church’s instruction being clear, we must now ask ourselves: is the current employment of modern instruments during mass an acceptable practice. The answer, based upon these documents, is no.

Take, for example, the employment of the piano during mass. Think of where the piano is most commonly used: the theater, television shows, movies, lounges, and other such secular institutions. Further, the piano is associated with genres such as jazz, rock, and classical secular music – all of which are thoroughly nonreligious.

Now, when a secular instrument is brought into the church and employed during mass, it fails to achieve the purpose of liturgical music, which Sacrosancum concilium defines as “the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful[.]” Instead, by inserting a secular instrument into divine worship, the mind is drawn away from the glory of God and instead towards the worldliness which the piano represents. How can the piano be described as befitting

“When a secular instrument is brought into the church and employed during mass, it fails to achieve the purpose of liturgical music.” of the divine when its form and function is that of the world?

Again, note the document’s wording: sacred music must serve the sanctification of the faithful. To sanctify something, to make it holy, is to draw it unto God and away from the world. An instrument so associated with the world from the faithful are to be drawn away is wholly unfit for sanctification. Instead, the use of secular instruments exalts neither God nor the faithful, but instead lowers the mass, the divine liturgy, to the level of the world. This entirely defies the purpose of the mass.

Other such instruments, so thoroughly steeped in worldliness, are similarly unsuitable. Few would argue that instruments such as the guitar and the like are entirely secular in nature. In fact, St. Pius X expressly forbade their use in the mass. If guitars were considered unsuitable in 1903, how much more unsuitable have they become, given their rise in rock, metal, and other such forms of music?

The worship of God is made for His glorification and adoration, and for the faithful to draw nearer to His majesty. Instruments such as the organ are able to lift the minds of the faithful away from the mundane and unto the ineffable power and glory of God. Instruments such as the piano and guitar fail to fully achieve the purpose of the liturgy and they are thus unsuitable for the mass.

Sources: “Pope St. Pius X - Adoremus Bulletin - http://www.adoremus.org/ MotuProprio.html” “Sacred Congregation for Rites Adoremus Bulletin - http://www. adoremus.org/1958Intro-sac-mus. html”

The Fenwick Review

6

October 2013

An American Satyricon

Our Modern World of Debauchery and Bored Melodrama trump the now-boring sexual shamelessness of Lady Dr. Victor Davis Hanson Gaga — still squirming about in a skimpy thong — at Special Guest Contributor an MTV awards ceremony? Bring out former Disney teenage star Miley Cyrus in a vinyl bikini, wearing This article appeared in National Review Online on some sort of huge foam finger on her hand to simuAugust 27, 2013. Victor Davis Hanson is an historian, a late lewd sex acts. classicist, and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Sometime in the mid-first century a.d., an otherwise little known consular official, Gaius Petronius, wrote a brilliant satirical novel about the gross and pretentious new Roman-imperial elite.

The Satyricon is an often-cruel parody about how the Roman agrarian republic of old had degenerated into a wealth-obsessed, empty society of wannabe new elites, flush with money, and both obsessed with and bored with sex. Most of the Satyricon is lost. But in its longest surviving chapter — “Dinner with Trimalchio” — Petronius might as well have been describing our own 21st-century nomenklatura.

For the buffoonish libertine guests of the host Trimalchio, food and sex are in such surfeit that they have to be repackaged in bizarre and repulsive ways. Think of someone like the feminist mayor of San Diego, Bob Filner, who once railed about the need to enforce sexual-harassment laws, now only to discover ever creepier ways to grope, pat, grab, squeeze, pinch, and slobber on 18 co-workers and veritable strangers, whether in their 20s or over 60.

Unfortunately, the sexual luridness does not necessarily end with Filner’s resignation; one of his would-be replacements is already under attack by his opponents on allegations that as a city councilman he was caught masturbating in the city-hall restroom between public meetings.

In good Petronian fashion, the narcissist Anthony Weiner sent pictures of his own genitalia to near-strangers, under the Latinate pseudonym “Carlos Danger.” Was Eliot Spitzer any better? As the governor of New York, he preferred anonymous numbers — “Client #9” — to false names, real to virtual sex, very young to mature women, and buying rather than romancing his partners. Is there some Petronian prerequisite in our age that our ascendant politicians must be perverts?

Transvestitism and sexual ambiguity are likewise Petronian themes; in our day, the controversy rages over whether convicted felon Bradley Manning is now a woman because he says he is. The politically correct term “transgendered” trumps biology; and if you doubt that, you are a homophobe or worse. As in the Roman Satyricon, our popular culture also displays a sick fascination with images of teen sex. So how does one

sexting episodes were tolerable, but another four or five, replete with more lies, risked parody.

Spitzer is again running for office — comptroller of New York City — and may well win. After all, Bill Clinton, feminist champion, protector of female subordinate employees from workplace harassers, survived Monicagate. John Edwards might have saved his political career had the tabloid National Enquirer not caught him red-handed with his mistress during the 2008 campaign, while his wife was dying of cancer. To an unimpressed masseuse, Al Gore appeared as a “crazed sex poodle.” That sobriquet did no more damage to Gore’s green empire than Trimalchio’s randy escapades imperiled his latifundia.

Another farce in the Satyricon involves the nonchalant ignorance of Trimalchio and his guests.

The wannabes equate influence and money with status and learning and so pontificate about current events, with made-up mythologies and half-educated references to history. When Trimalchio and his banqueters begin to sermonize on literature, almost everything that follows turns out to be wrong — as Petronius reminds us how high learning has become as inane a commodity as food or sex, and only sort of half consumed, rather like the 2008 campaign of faux Greek columns and Vero possumus, which were supposed to convey gravitas.

Likewise, in our version, what does a The orgies at Trimalchio’s cool Pompeii es- $200,000 Ivy League education or a graduate degree tate (think Malibu) suggest that in imperial-Roman really get you any more? In the sophisticated world society Kardashian-style displays of wealth and Clin- of our political and highly credentialed elites, there tonian influence-peddling were matter-of-fact rather are 57 states. Atlantic Coast cities are said to lie along than shocking. Note that in our real version of the the Gulf of Mexico; after all, they are down there novel’s theme, Mayor Filner was not bothered by his somewhere in the South. The Malvinas become the exposure, and finally had to be nearly dragged out Maldives — Ma- with an s at the end seems close of office. Carlos Danger would have been mayor of enough. Corps-men serve in the military (as zomNew York, but the liberal press finally became wor- bies?). ried over its embarrassment: Apparently two or three Continued on page 7

“The Satyricon is an often-cruel parody about how the Roman agrarian republic of old had degenerated into a wealthobsessed, empty society of wannabe new elites, flush with money, and both obsessed with and bored with sex. ”

The Fenwick Review

October 2013

7

An American Satyricon (cont.)

Our Modern World of Debauchery and Bored Melodrama

Dr. Victor Davis Hanson Special Guest Contributor Continued from page 6 Medgar Evans was a civil-rights icon, but you know whom we mean. President Roosevelt addressed the nation on television after the stock-market crash in 1929 — well, he would have, had he been president then and if only Americans had had televisions in their homes. And how are we to know that what we read from celebrity authors is not just made up or plagiarized, whether a Maureen Dowd column or a Doris Kearns Goodwin book?

The famously nouveau-riche Trimalchio’s guests drop the names of the rich and powerful, mostly to remind one another that they are now among the plutocracy that is replacing the old bankrupt aristocracy. We too are seeing something like that metamorphosis. It is hard to guess on any given summer weekend which populist progressive family — the Obamas, the Clintons, the Kerrys, the Gores — will be ensconced on what particular Hamptons, Nantucket, or Martha’s Vineyard beach, rubbing shoulders with just the sort of Silicon Valley or Wall Street new zillionaires who during work hours are supposed to be the evil “1 percent” and “fat cats” who need to be forced to pay their “fair share.”

Al Gore, like Trimalchio, does not mutter a word without revealing his ignorance — or hypocrisy.

Over the last 15 years, the planet has not heated up, and the science of global warming is not established, which is why the nomenclature had to change from global warming to climate change to climate chaos in order to account for too much bothersome wet, snowy, and cold weather. The reconciler, who became a near-billionaire both hyping global warming

and selling medieval-style indulgences as antidotes, now claims those who disagree with him are comparable to fascists and racists. All this comes from a wheeler-dealer who made big money damning fossil fuels only to sell a failing cable station to an antiSemitic, anti-American fascistic enterprise, fueled by the millions garnered from the vast export of oil and gas from the Arabian peninsula. And to complete Gore’s Trimalchian man-of-the-people profile, he rushed the sale in hopes of beating the new, higher capital-gains taxes that he had been urging for lesser folk — sort of like progressive John Kerry buying and berthing his grand new yacht in Rhode Island to avoid the high excise and sales taxes in his home state of Massachusetts.

Farce and psychodrama pass for entertainment in the Satyricon. A country that once lost 600 legionnaires a minute at Cannae is reduced to gossiping about precious jewelry, exotic food, and sick gladiatorial games in the arena. Our elites go through some of the same bored melodrama. Withdrawal dates, red lines, deadlines, and leading from behind form our new rhetorical military. While Trimalchio parties in Pompeii on stuffed boar and sparrows (sort of like wagyu beef on a bed of arugula), somewhere to the unmentioned north legionnaires keep back the “barbarians” on the Rhine and the Danube. But they are as out of sight and mind as those who are camped out tonight in the Afghan highlands, or the “at this point, what difference does it make?” Americans killed in Benghazi, or the SEAL teams who dropped in on bin Laden while the president was playing card games with staffers.

Civil rights once meant an existential struggle between the oppressed and villains like Bull Connor with his dogs and fire hoses. Now Oprah is miffed over being treating rudely while eyeing a $38,000 purse in Switzerland; the NAACP wants sensitivity training

for a rodeo clown with an Obama mask; American Idol’s failed contestants sue for “cruel and inhuman treatment”; near-billionaire rapper Jay-Z warns that the have-nots may riot; and a depressed former congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. was reduced to spending $750,000 of other people’s money on essentials like stuffed elk heads and Michael Jackson’s old fedora.

Just as Petronius’s world went on for another 400 years, ours may too.

National Review Online contributor Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. His latest book is The Savior Generals, published this spring by Bloomsbury Books.

The Fishbowl Fallacy (cont.)

A Lack of Lively Debate

Chase Padusniak ‘15 Staff Writer Continued from page 1 And that is why Holy Cross should bring back a more, dare I say, intense form of debate. Picture two professors, two podiums, and a moderator and you’re on your way to what I’m talking about.

What we need is a revitalized idea of what debate

means – not silencing any kind of opposition but points on the road to victory, about recognizing your allowing equally valid and equally accepted sides to opponent’s position in order to learn something from enter into genuine conflict in an academic setting.

him. If the debaters are learning, then the audience is

No more fishbowls with students poking at glass

learning and that is the path to a truly open, accept-

looking in at a sleeping fish about to be crushed by

ing, and actually stimulating intellectual atmosphere.

a plastic castle. Instead, we need a format that al-

We cannot ignore the flaccid nature of our fishbowl

lows professors to attack each other’s positions, to discussions and we need to admit, by returning to a enter the debate with real openness. A fishbowl is

Socratic/Platonic notion of dialogue, that the truth

all about containment, about being trapped by your

will, in fact, set us free.

own ideas. A debate is about willingness to concede

The Fenwick Review

8

October 2013

The Fenwick Review

9

Al-Shabaab: A Threat to the US?

Al-Shabaab: A Threat to the US? (cont.)

Somali Terrorists Behind Mall Attack in Nairobi, Kenya

Somali Terrorists Behind Mall Attack in Nairobi, Kenya

Al-Shabaab, which translates as “the Youth,”

John Castro ‘14 Copy Editor

is a terrorist network based in the vast lawless regions of Somalia. Founded by Islamic extremists in 2006,

Saturday, September 21, 2013, started off as a fun, relaxing day for the hundreds of shoppers inside the upscale Westgate mall in Nairobi, Kenya; however, this tranquil scene was transformed into a nightmare when heavily armed members of the al-Shabaab terrorist organization, an al-Qaeda affiliate, stormed the mall and began rounding up visitors. After releasing individuals determined to be Muslim, the gunmen proceeded to execute, and in some cases torture, many of the remaining people, including women, children and foreign tourists. Others were kept as hostages to be used as leverage against Kenyan security forces during the ensuing three day standoff.

the group initially used terrorist tactics to hinder efforts to establish a central government in Mogadishu, a measure incompatible with al-Shabaab’s desire to impose strict Sharia law on the country. In addition to regularly staging suicide bombings and other asymmetric attacks against Somalia’s fragile central government, al-Shabaab has targeted foreign entities supporting secular rule for Somalia. These include attacks on African Union, Ethiopian, Kenyan and Ugandan troops operating in Somalia, as well as foreign aid and non-governmental organization workers.

In 2012, the group expanded beyond its local aims when it formally aligned with al-Qaeda, gaining finan-

Ultimately, 67 individuals (61 civilians and six secu- cial, material and human support from foreign jihadrity officers) were killed and over 200 were injured, ists. Today, the network is considered to be one of

“Al-Shabaab, which translates as ‘the Youth,’ is a terrorist network based in the vast lawless regions of Somalia... Today, the network is considered to be one of al-Qaeda’s more capable regional affiliates.”

their ambition to stage attacks in that country. This making it the worst terrorist attack in Kenya since the al-Qaeda’s more capable regional affiliates.

The possibility of a major terrorist attack in claim of being able to execute a major terrorist attack 1998 bombing of the United States Embassy by an alQaeda cell. Concerned about U.S. homeland security, Kenya was no secret. Since the 2011 commencement outside Somalia’s borders was not without precedent. the American people and media were asking: Who is

of Kenyan military operations against al-Shabaab

al-Shabaab and do they present a threat to the U.S.?

in Somali, terrorist leaders have consistently voiced

Continued on page 9

Citizenship of Senator Cruz Is Ted Cruz Eligible to be President?

Hayward Shine ‘16 Staff Writer

whether or not he will run but rather is he eligible

Some claim that the only way to truly be a

to run for the presidency. This question gets raised

natural born citizen is to be born in the United States

because there is some contention regarding whether or in its territories and that natural citizenship cannot be transferred through parenthood. This quesor not Cruz meets the Constitution’s requirement The next presidential election is three years tion remains so hotly contested because the Supreme of being a “natural born citizen.”

He was born in from now, but it is never too early to begin the specuCourt has yet to provide the public with an answer Canada to a Cuban father and an American mother. lation. One of the most talked about as to what qualifies as a natural born potential candidates is U.S. Senator citizen. Associate Justice (and Holy Ted Cruz, the Ivy League educated, Tea Party candidate from the Lone

Cross alumnus) Clarence Thomas joked during a congressional hearing

Star State of Texas. He has made a

that in regards to this question “we’re

name for himself due to his prin-

evading that one.”

cipled stances on issues such as the

Without a definite answer to

repeal of Obamacare and protection

this question, a variety of opinions is

of the Second Amendment, in the

inevitable. As for Senator Cruz, he is

face of many calling for stricter gun

fervent in his belief that he is a natu-

control. Some view him as the young

ral born citizen, arguing, “my mother

charismatic candidate that will be for

was born in Wilmington, Delaware.

conservatives what Barack Obama

She is a U.S. citizen, so I’m a U.S.

was for liberals in 2008.

citizen.” It is also worth noting that

October 2013

However, with re-

if he does decide to run for president,

spect to Ted Cruz’s possible can-

he would be willing to renounce his

didacy, the biggest question is not

Canadian citizenship.

John Castro ‘14 Copy Editor Continued from page 8

Although there is evidence suggesting al-

should refrain from any type of direct intervention.

Shabaab could perpetrate attacks against U.S. inter-

Currently, the Obama Administration has authorized

ests abroad and possibly even the homeland, this

the use of drone strikes in Somalia. This is an accept-

should not prompt U.S. leaders to pursue a more

able method for targeting known al-Shabaab leaders;

active counterterrorism policy against the organiza-

however, strikes will not eliminate the threat. Support

tion abroad. Focus should remain on: gathering intel- for al-Shabaab stems mainly from the economic, poIn 2010, al-Shabaab perpetrated a series of ligence on recruiting cells operating within the U.S., litical and social instability of Somalia, not al-Qaeda’s suicide bombing at two venues in Kampala, Uganda disrupting financial support networks, tracking citi- ideology. It is important to focus on the regional iswhere crowds had gathered to watch the FIFA World zens who leave the country for jihadist camps, and sues that allow al-Shabaab to flourish, which are difCup Final match. This attack killed 74 people and left many more injured. It was only a matter of time before al-Shabaab attempted an attack in Kenya in hopes of forcing the Kenyan government to withdraw its troops, which in 2012 had pushed the terror network out of their key stronghold in the Somali port city of Kismayo.

Some experts have declared that the Westgate mall attack is a sign that al-Shabaab capabilities are on the decline. They assert that al-Shabaab’s return to terrorist tactics, from having once established control of large amounts of territory in Somalia, is a sign that the group is now weak and fragmented. This argument is problematic, considering the plot was well planned and executed. Early reports suggest the mall attackers owned a store in mall, allowing them to gather intelligence on the target. Consequently, they knew the Westgate mall was a soft target, a location where the potential for mass-civilian casualties was high, and the possibility of immediate intervention by seA map detailing al-Shabaab’s area of operation and some of their major attacks. (Photo credit: Agence France-Presse) curity forces was low. Additionally, they were careful to select non-Muslims as their targets, a lesson learned from al-Qaeda in Iraq, whose indis- improving homeland security measures at U.S. ports ferent from the global ideological ambitions of alcriminate bombings killed many more Muslims than of entry to prevent potentially radicalized citizens Qaeda.

U.S. and other Western soldiers, incurring backlash from reentering the nation undetected. In terms of One solution would be for the Obama Adfrom Iraqis. addressing the al-Shabaab threat in Africa, the U.S. ministration to pledge material and financial support In terms of implications for and military training to the weak the U.S., there is legitimate reason Somali central government and its for concern. Recent reports by the allies in the African Union, EthioU.S. intelligence community indicate pian, Kenyan and Ugandan governal-Shabaab has established sophisments, but allow them to formulate ticated recruiting networks within and execute their own military strikes cities with large Somali populations, and counterterrorism operations such as Minneapolis, Portland, and in Somalia. To effectively mitigate Seattle. According to an ABC News the threat from al-Shabaab, a major article published September 22nd, nation-building effort in Somalia is at least 50 Somali-Americans depart required, a mission the U.S. military the U.S. for jihadist training camps is not equipped to effectively underin Somalia. It is also estimated that take. Only multilateral efforts led by the terrorist network receives a sigAfrican governments and supported nificant amount of financial support

by Western states and international from sympathizers in the U.S. Given its alliance with al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab could add attacking the U.S. homeland to its list of objectives.

organizations will effectively counter Al-Shabaab militants training outside of Mogadishu, Somalia. (Photo credit: AP)

the rise of al-Shabaab and strengthen the Somali national government.

The Fenwick Review

10

October 2013

The Fenwick Review

October 2013

11

Debt Crisis Brewing in China?

On Christ and Capitalism

Not Quite.

A Response to the “Christianity and Capitalism” Panel

David Odell ‘14 Staff Writer In Niall Ferguson’s best-selling book Civilization: The West and the Rest, the Harvard professor calmly asserts that we are presiding over “the end of 500 years of Western domination.” Western nations, according to Ferguson, have achieved prosperity, while southern and eastern countries have lagged because occidental nations possessed competition, science, property rights, modern medicine, consumerism, and a Protestant work ethic. Developing the aforementioned characteristics has allowed the western world to achieve high levels of economic growth, and for better or worse, dictate the international order. However, the paradigm of economic growth is shifting. Since approximately 2000, developing nations, led by Brazil, Russia, India and China have expanded to comprise 25% of the world’s aggregate economic output.

No nation epitomizes this historic economic growth more than China. The Communist nation that spent the majority of the 20th century plagued by political instability and anemic growth, has averaged 10.1% GDP growth over the past two decades, rightfully leading economists to proclaim that the Middle Kingdom is once again an economic superpower. Valued at $9 trillion, China boasts the second largest economy in the world, behind only the United States’ $16 trillion GDP and roughly double the size of the third largest economy, Japan. However, in recent years the Communist Party’s spending policies have made the U.S. government appear frugal and may be setting up China for a catastrophic economic collapse that could reverberate throughout the global economy.

Following the 2008 financial crisis and the subsequent Eurozone debt saga, consumption in developed nations came to a halt, as did China’s ability to export their way to prosperity. To combat stagnant growth, China’s Communist Party has ramped up government spending and investment to maintain GDP. Since 1982, government investment as a percentage of GDP has exceeded 30% yearly, however that figure jumped to above 45% in 2009.

Therefore, the crux of the problem is that China’s debt-GDP level is increasing at breakneck speed and is estimated by Fitch Ratings Agency to reach 270% of GDP by 2017. Furthermore, Chinese research teams recently calculated that China’s local government debt alone now exceeds $3.3 tril-

lion. These numbers are staggering and have histori- tion’s infinite borrowing and spending. For instance, cally proven to be unsustainable. Consider Greece, as sovereign bondholders of Greece, Italy and Spain Italy and Spain, three nations that brought Europe became weary over the unsustainable nature of their to the brink of collapse because of excessive spend- debt-GDP ratios, a sell-off ensued and capital fled the Eurozone. Once capital leaves a nation, borrowing costs skyrocket and the currency deprecates, increasing the debt load further and making it incredibly difficult to fund the government. But China is not susceptible to an externally driven financial crisis because, as of March, 2013, only $750 billion of China’s debt is held by foreign investors. To put this number into perspective, China presently possesses $1.32 trillion of U.S. government debt via Treasuries and could dump these on the market sending Treasury yields soaring whenever the Communist Party becomes fed up with Washington’s fiscal policies.

In addition to the security of domestically held debt, in order to make Chinese products cheaper internationally, the People’s Bank of China has taken measures to devalue the Chinese yuan by purchasing $3.5 trillion of foreign exchange reserves and roughly $1 trillion worth of U.S Treasuries. These assets, totaling about 35% of China’s total economy, can be used strategically by the CPC to prevent a financial ing, have debt-GDP levels hovering around 130% to crisis. Differing from the expansionary monetary pol150%. The Communist Party’s commitment to main- icy measures used by the Federal Reserve and other tain growth has built up debt stock almost double the central banks in recent years to combat stagnant Eurozone’s and compares only to Japan’s own un- growth, the People’s Bank of China has the ability to sustainable debt-GDP ratio of approximately 280%. defend the yuan against capital outflows or pay down the debt without printing money. Simply put, China Despite elevated debt-GDP figures that has $4 trillion in strategic assets that can be allocated throughout economic history have proven to be to prevent a looming crisis. catastrophic, (i.e. the Asian and Latin American debt China’s rise over the past three decades has defaults in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s), China been an extraordinary development in economic has strategically positioned itself with defensive assets history and, despite tenuous Sino-U.S. relations, to prevent national bankruptcy. The most important one cannot help but root for continued prosperity measure China has executed to protect financial sta- because it has improved the livelihood of millions bility is ensuring issued debt is held domestically. This of Chinese citizens. That said, the CPC’s spending is vital because holding debt within the tight control measures are simply unsustainable. Continuing to of the Chinese government prevents debt from being increase a debt-GDP ratio already exceeding 200% sold-off as investors become concerned over the na- is misguided policy. Fortunately, for China and the global economy, having debt held domestically, along with $4 trillion in strategic assets creates a buffer that the United States and Europe simply don’t possess. However, China should not maintain infinite fiscal stimulus, but rather the Communist government should accept decreased economic output and transition to a consumption centered economy. This is not only sound economic policy, but increasing wages and encouraging consumption could help the CPC politically as the party breaks in Xi Jinping as the nation’s new premier.

“ In recent years the Communist Party’s spending policies ... may be setting up China for a catastrophic economic collapse that could reverberate throughout the global economy.”

Patrick J. Horan ‘14 Co-Editor in Chief On the evening of October 8, as students hunkered down before midterm exams, Holy Cross Professors Donald Brand of political science and Matthew Eggemeier of religious studies joined Assumption Professor Marc Guerra of theology for a panel discussion sponsored by the Charles Carroll Program and the Holy Cross Department of Political Science in the Rehm Library on the nexus between Christianity and the market economy. The event was held, in part, for Dr. Brand’s “Greed: From Christianity to Capitalism” class, a seminar exclusively for sophomores with impressive academic records. Although the conversation was titled “Christianity and Capitalism,” much of the discussion focused more specifically on Roman Catholic attitudes toward free enterprise.

Dr. Guerra began the conversation by commenting that while there is no clear Catholic teaching on capitalism in its entirety per se, there are clearly established Church positions on different motivations and aspects of market-based economics. Avarice is obviously a Deadly Sin. Saint Thomas Aquinas, influenced heavily by Aristotle’s writings, advocated a theory of just prices, prices that could be

“ Pope Leo strongly defended the right of one to own private property as a natural right, so long as private property would be used in a way to meet one’s own needs and to address the needs of others.” deemed to be fair for both buyers and sellers. Aquinas also condemned usury, the practice of setting unfairly high interest rates (in Aquinas’ time period any interest rate would probably be construed as unfair). Despite Aquinas’ negative views on these aspects of the market economy in the 13th century, the Church developed something of a “middle-ground” approach in the 19th century as intellectual as well as physical battles took shape between capitalists and communists. Pope Leo XII argued that capitalism, if

St. Thomas Aquinas and Pope Leo XII unchecked, would certainly lead to the exploitation of the poor and would be an attack on the dignity of the human being. Therefore, unions and guilds were necessary to mitigate these ill effects. Nevertheless, Pope Leo strongly defended the right of one to own private property as a natural right, so long as private property would be used in a way to meet one’s own needs and to address the needs of others. He was also a staunch critic of socialism, especially because of that movement’s atheistic, Marxian precepts. Under more recent popes, we have seen that the Church generally tends to promote free markets, but within certain limitations.

Professor Eggemeier concurred with Professor Guerra’s remarks that there is no definitive answer on the Church’s relationship with capitalism.

However, he also made clear his criticisms of capitalistic societies. Although capitalism has helped provide good things, including basic necessities for life, it has not helped people equally and many have been left behind. Income inequality has worsened in recent decades in the United States, and there are millions who struggle to make ends meet. Pointing to carbon dioxide emissions in particular, he also claimed the “biggest failure” of capitalism to be its inability to adequately curtail environmental degradation. In addition to these problems, Eggemeier also warned of the “idolatry of the market,” claiming that even those who benefitted materialistically from capitalism risked dehumanization if they abandoned checks on materialism such as faith or family.

Professor Brand had the most “pro-market” view among the panelists. Although he did not dispute the existence of short-comings in capitalist societies and recognized the validity of Professor Eggemeier’s concerns, he said capitalism is probably the “only game in town.” If economies can be arranged

in roughly three ways, they are socialism, capitalism, and a so-called “third-way” that takes elements of the other two. The failures and horrors of the 20th century – in the forms of both fascism and communism – should be enough evidence to debunk socialism.

The third-way can take on a multitude of forms. One variant is partial government ownership of some industries, such as utilities. However, in such economies we see that these industries are notoriously inefficient and non-innovative. They may be necessary in some cases (such as electric lines – one cannot practically have different lines running through his property), but it should be minimized. Another form example of the third way would be the corporatism that exists in certain parts of Europe where trade associations, unions, and corporate groups have significantly more power than they do in the United States. This system does not empirically work well either as it lends itself to rampant inefficiency and corruption. Brand mentioned that the elements of corporatism were found in the National Recovery Administration of the New Deal, the subject of his doctoral dissertation.

An inevitable problem when discussing different economic systems is the use of generalities when reality shows us that are various shades of gray.

Capitalism in the United States differs from the capitalism in Western European countries, and both differ from the capitalism in Singapore. Socialism suffers from theoretical short-comings, and history is rife with examples to prove it. Therefore, we are and ought to be dealing primarily with capitalism and different degrees of free enterprise. Professor Brand appears to be more inclined than Professor Eggemeier to find free-market solutions to our problems, but along with Professor Guerra, they all want the same end: a more equitable society that allows us to prosper but also to live like Christ.

The Fenwick Review

October 2013

The 2013

ISI Essay Contest What is social justice?

What does it mean, and is it just?

$9,000 IN PRIZES 2,000 words or fewer

DEADLINE: December 1, 2013 Submissions or questions: e-mail essaycontest@isi.org

In Gratitude to Our Sponsors and Partners

12