The Hotchkiss Review | January 2017

January 17th, 2017

THE HOTCHKISS REVIEW

ISSUE TWO

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Letter to Trump Lucas Astorian ’17 1-2 The Aftermath of Olympic Games: Lessons to be Learned Summer Liu ’19 2-4 Here is Why Your Vote Did Not Matter Nick Fleisher ’18 5-6 The Bad, the Ruinous, and the Dangerous: A U.S. Perspective on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Noah Smith ’18 6-8 Lessons on GMOs Aadi Kulkarni ’18 8-10 The Right to Die Annabelle Burns ’18 10-11 Is Hong Kong part of China? Brian Wong ’19 11-13 NFL Struggles Sol Broady ’18 13-14 Bureaucracy Behind Relief Funds: The Sad Truth Daniel Pai ’19 14-15 The AKP and their Purge of Kurds Ian Gill ’19 15-16 Tensions in Kashmir Priyanka Kumar ’18 16-17 Colombian Peace Deal Anton de Lesseps ’18 17-18 Against Drug Legalization Michael Li ’18 18-19 On the Legalization of Marijuana Andrey Von Emme ’18

Message from the Editors: Thank you for picking up one of our issues. The purpose of the Review is to cut open the Hotchkiss bubble by giving our writers a medium for their thoughts and our readers meaningful commentaries on the outside world. It is said that Hotchkiss students are the leaders of the future, and so the student body should be wellversed in the uncertainties surrounding the world’s most pertinent issues. The Review challenges both its writers and readers to wrap their minds around the problems of today—and to do so in a way that engages the entire community.

Letter to Trump

Lucas Astorian ’17 Dear Mr. Trump, The 2016 presidential campaign has not produced any promising solutions to our nation’s political, social and racial issues. Instead, painful spectacles have exemplified America’s core dilemma: our inability to take ownership of our own problems. Fingers have been pointed at obscure entities including “China”, “the one percent”, “the system”, “crooked politicians” and various immigrant groups. This all too familiar witch-hunt continues a recurring trend in American and human history: blaming abstractions and minority groups for phenomena we don’t understand.

The Salem witch trials, McCarthyism, the anti-Jewish pogroms and the September massacres of the French Revolution all exhibit a common theme: we often exaggerate or even invent the forces that “pose” an immediate threat to us, and in so doing, commit the gravest injustices against one another.

Instead of creating scapegoats, we need to examine the specific systemic forces and incentives that lead people to act a certain way, giving rise to our social and political instabilities. For example, your widespread supporters represent the culmination of both direct and indirect frustrations at the increasing national wealth gap. The wages of most white, working class Americans have stagnated since the 1970s, while the economic gains of the past decades have gone to the ul-

tra-rich. The top decile of the American public now earns fifty percent of national income, instead of the thirty-five percent it did fifty years ago, while the middle class feels “marginalized and disenfranchised” (Kristof, The New York Times).

predatory lending practices allowed banks such as Wells Fargo to profit from the exploitation of minority communities. Businessmen need to be held to the same level of moral accountability as everyone else, especially when it comes to financial crimes. Tax loopholes These increasing divisions that should be eliminated along with have formed among Americans the incentives that encourage finanhave created and enhanced a myr- cial exploitation in the first place. iad of other problems. Competing interest groups have emerged, fu- Mr. Trump, you embody the very eling the political polarization we mechanisms that have birthed tosee in America today. Skewed leg- day’s social and political tensions. islation that failed to address social You favor financial deregulation, tensions magnified these divisions. one of the chief causes of the 2008 The media’s bleak coverage of one financial crisis. You don’t pay taxdisaster after another ensures that es, yet bemoan the state of Amercivilized discussions about poli- ica’s infrastructure today. By your tics quickly devolve into shouting own account, you profited from the matches. The brawls that result dis- 2008 financial crisis, exploiting the tract from an investigations into the very people you claim to champiactual causes of our issues, ensuring on. Instead of helping us identify that they remain unresolved. Most our problems, you have led us on importantly, popular misrepresen- a wild goose chase. The only way tations and misconceptions about we can progress as a country is by the origin and extent of dilemmas taking collective ownership of our (and sometimes the lack thereof) predicament, and making the interhas ensured that the main problem nal changes necessary to change the is not found in reality, but in the incentives of misaligned system. way reality is perceived. The resulting scapegoating has divided us in Kind Regards, a time when we need to be united.

Lucas Astorian Our current frustrations are largely the products of a system that deliberately rewards the exploitation of others. As economist Joseph Stiglitz explains, “Much of America’s inequality is the result of market distortions, with incentives directed not at creating new wealth but at taking it from others” (Kristof, The New York Times).

The 2008 subprime mortgage crisis epitomizes the root of this problem—financial deregulation and

1

Aftermath of The Olympics Summer Liu ’19

On August 8th, 2008, Beijing presented to the world the most spectacular opening ceremony ever, featuring over 2,000 synchronized drummers waving glowing drumsticks that made the audience ecstatic. The Olympic Games, gathering worldwide attention every two years, would always kick off

with a glorious opening ceremony in an ornate stadium, performers and music corresponding to each other in marvelous sets. In the following two weeks, the welcoming host would try its best to represent the country’s abilities and energy.

However, under the sugar coating of a proud and luxurious Olympic games, not all hosts end up well – some cities are left in tatters, with citizens’ lives ruined, while others are boosted with a little pre-calculation.

The Athens Olympics is a quintessential example of failed postgames-planning – or perhaps they didn’t even plan anything postgames. The Olympic venues are only white elephants, covered in weeds and graffiti, while the $15 million spent on construction vaporized in the vacancy of the stadiums and 21 out of the 22 sports complexes are unused.The country took an Olympic slide downwards into the puddle of financial crisis, from which Greece still struggles to free itself.

The Chinese might have done a little better after possibly the best Olympic games ever, spending $480 million just on building. Rather than sitting in the wilderness without any maintenance, some of the venues are in use: the “Water Cube” partly as a water park, the National Stadium open for public use and big events. However, among the 31 venues that are scattered around the city, some are sitting there rotting while the maintenance fee is $11 million each year.

Many of these complexes, though, were built on grounds cleared by house demolition. 1.5 million res-

idents were forced to leave their communities in order to prepare the country for the grand games.

Though they were compensated, many complained that the compensation was not even enough to cover the electricity and water bill, not to mention the extra transportation fee for some who were relocated away from their workplaces. This successful sporting event undoubtedly stirred national pride, but this prize came with a hardly affordable price, both in monetary and humanitarian terms.

be always a tenacity test for the hosting city and country, where the countries go out of their way to improve their appearance to the outside while ruining the lives of its own citizens?

Barcelona and Sydney answered in clear and loud voices that there is another way. By planning ahead and controlling the budgets, Barcelona reformed its city into one of the most popular tourist attraction in Europe by connecting the city to the beach without heavy debts; Sydney, being the most organized host, turned the surroundings of the Olympic park into its own suburb, drawing over 12 million annual visitors. No reports of abused human rights for Olympics. These two cities provide us a path to economical and humanitarian Olympic games that is more than a display of strength and wealth. The purpose of the games is to promote peace and harmony between the international community, but how is it ever going to achieve that goal if the spotlight is always rotating between the same rich and stable hosts, many of whom cover up their history of human rights abuses? No more “sinking Athens” should occur when a highway to smartly benefit is already built and running. What made humans human is our excellent ability to learn from the others; when we fail at that, we shall eventually fail at everything else.

The Brazilians were also suffering when the government tried to move them away. Thousands of children were left unable to access education and other social services, and “72% of relocated families have been moved away from areas prone to floods and landslides, and 9.6% for transportation and other infrastructure projects that benefit the city as a whole” (Watts, The Guardian).

Unfortunately for the poor, some of the empty space where their houses used to stand will be built into upper-class residential areas that take advantage of the mega-event, while the original residents tolerate an even worsened living conditions.

Sochi was also a site of humanitarian crisis, where not only were citizens forced out of their homes, some uncompensated, but also the Russian government harmed the local environment, constructing sites and illegally dumping waste Here is Why Your Vote Did that badly damaged the local ecoNot Matter… system. Citizens in these cities Nick Fleisher ’18 still deal with negligence from the government after protesting, while …If you don’t live in a swing journalists who try to uncover the state. Jim is a Republican and he truth get warnings or even death lives in New York. Since the 1984 threats. Should the Olympic games election, all of New York’s votes

2

have gone to the Democratic ticket.

While Jim votes for the Republican candidate, his vote means nothing, as it opposes the majority of other New Yorkers. This is the same for Tom, a Democrat living in Idaho; or Jessica, a Republican living in California. As American citizens, they go out and vote every election season, but each time it means nothing.

How can one vote equal no votes?

It’s simple - it’s called the Electoral College, the core of our voting system that is held together by the Twelfth Amendment. It’s time to pick it up, throw it in the food processor, and create a fresh, new pie. One where every bite counts.

So what does the Twelfth Amendment tell us? How does voting in our country work? It’s not as simple as a popular election, where the winning candidate is decided by whoever holds a majority of the total votes in the country. It does, however, start with the citizens.

Every Tuesday following the first Monday in November, Americans (excluding early and postal voters) go out and vote for the candidate who they support. Every state, excluding Maine and Nebraska, is considered winner-take-all. This means that whichever candidate gets more votes from a state receives all of its Electoral College votes. The state’s Electoral College is comprised of electors, equal to the amount of Senators and Representatives it has - making them somewhat proportional to the state’s population. Take California, which has 55 electors, as an example of this system. In 2012, more than 50% of the state’s voters (60.24% to be exact) supported Barack Obama, so therefore all 55 electors

pledged their votes to him. Once a candidate receives the majority 270 electoral votes, they win the race.

While electors can vote for whoever they want in the end (“faithless electors”), it is uncommon and 29 states (along with the District of Columbia) have laws that require them to vote as directed by their people. In fact, according to the National Archives, 99% of electors in history have voted as instructed.

The two states that are exceptions to this winner-take-all system, Maine and Nebraska, employ what is called the Congressional District Method. This means that the winning candidate in each congressional district is given one electoral vote, and the statewide winner is given the leftover two electoral votes. Although these two state give citizens more of a chance at affecting an actual electoral vote, their structures are still not all that close to a one-person onevote system. In addition, these

3

two states only count for nine of the country’s 538 current electors, playing a very minute role in the larger picture. While this explanation only skims on the surface of the complex system, it paints a broad picture of our voting system that all Americans ought to be aware of.

Due to the complexity behind the system, Americans have been wary to act against it. When the Electoral College process was first laid out in 1787, it made complete sense. At the time, the thirteen states that comprised America were much more individual entities than a united nation. Citizens trusted their states over the Federal Government, and thus would vote for whoever was most local to them.

In addition, the general public was not nearly as informed as it is has the potential to be today. With less media resources, people who were not government officials would have little to no way of learning about each candidate. The result

of this would be larger states always having their candidates winning presidency, threatening the democratic aspects of the country.

Today, however, the system does not make as much sense. Controversy over its applicability has erupted in recent years. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), which began in 2006, is an agreement between states in favor of a popular vote. So far, 165 electors from ten states (and D.C.) have been pledged through such legislation. This number is 61.1% of the way to the 270 majority mark, when the entire system will convert to a popular vote. This means that each state’s electoral votes will go to whichever candidate wins a majority of the country’s votes, essentially abolishing the current system.

So why are our state’s leaders looking to drown out the Electoral College? First of all, it allows a president to take office without a majority of the country’s vote. By winning just over 50% of the vote in a set group of 39 states and the District of Columbia, a candidate could win with just under 22% of the popular vote. In the 2000 presidential election, for example, Al Gore became the fourth candidate to lose an election with a majority of the popular vote. Another argument against the system is that less populous states have a disproportionate ratio of electors to voters, meaning that their voters count more in the broad picture. In addition, in swing states, which this year include Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Virginia, each vote is more important. This has had crippling ef-

fects on voter turnout, wherein each of these states has seen on average 25% more voters in recent years than other states. Finally, the current system does not support those in U.S. territories, such as Guam and Puerto Rico. These territories do not have electors, leaving their five million citizens without the ability to cast a vote in federal elections. With this, we are left with what seems like a better option: a national popular vote.

and arguably most significant, the ability to choose our next president would lie in the hands of people who are not nearly as informed as those who compose the Electoral College or any other government role.

While this issue was more pressing in 1787, it is still one that is apparent in 2016. Despite the grand role of media in the United States, many voters are unable to name even a single policy or belief of the candidate they are choosing to vote for. With a In a system where the country votes uninformed general public, the quesas a whole, the candidate that receives tion lies on creating a popular voting a majority of the country’s votes will system where voters can be trusted. win. No longer would presidential campaigns be overly focussed on less The solution is to make American populous states that have unequal voters pass a Civics Test, like one electors to voters ratios. No longer seen on the Naturalization Test for would extravagantly more campaign- people applying to become U.S. citing be done in swing states, but rath- izens. These tests feature questions er in places naturally most populous. ranging from specifics of the ConstiWith every vote counting, Ameri- tution to the form of the government cans would be incentived to show and even to local representatives. up and cast their votes - as opposed Questions such as “What stops one to the weak 57.5% of eligible voters branch of government from becomwho partook in the 2012 election. ing too powerful?” and “What is the economic system of the United While it sounds very enticing, the States?” might seem simple to eduidea is yet to reach compromise cated Americans, but it is not the same within the Federal Government due for everyone. Knowing the answers to negative aspects. In a popular vot- to the 100 civics questions a person ing system, densely populated areas applying for U.S. citizenship would would see more focus from cam- need to know, would provide voters paigns. The country would become a strong enough base of knowledge centralized and the importance of to make an informed decision. Rathstates would be decreased, opposing er than, like the Founding Fathers the importance of state’s rights laid feared, voting based on self-interest out in the Constitution and general or misguided beliefs, voters who American ideals. Voting issues, like know the system of their government the recount of Florida’s votes in the will make smart decisions. They can 2000 election, would become cen- understand what media outlets are tralized as well, making them less telling them and how to interpret easy to solve. In addition, the op- what they hear. This simple test, partposition claims that it is less credi- nered with a national popular voting ble when a president wins with, for system, serves as the perfect reexample, 58% of the popular vote, placement for the Electoral College as opposed to a larger sum, such as system defined by the 12th Amend85%, of the electoral vote. Finally, ment.

4

The Bad, the Ruinous, and the Dangerous: A U.S. Perspective on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Noah Smith ’18

It’s most ambitious trade deal we have ever put forth. Sparked by the smaller “P4 agreement,” the TPP sets out to create a free, fair, and focused economy amongst its twelve member countries: the U.S., Japan, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Brunei, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Chile, and Peru–40% of the world’s GDP. The trade agreement is the biggest ever in history. Negotiated in secrecy for over eight years, it is unbelievably intricate and long at 5,600 pages–almost as long and a beautiful as Donald Trump’s tax returns. Unlike Trump’s tax returns, however, the TPP has recently been released to the public. As such we know that the TPP employs everything from trade tariffs to investor-state dispute settlement.

With policies like these, the TPP sets out to encourage far-flung free trade amongst member countries.

Currently, the TPP has been signed by all member country representatives and awaits each respective country’s ratification process. The U.S. ratification process requires Congress to approve of the trade agreement.

This has begged the question: Is the deal actually any good? This has been subject to the American public’s scrutiny, and TPP opponents including Senator Bernie Sanders and presidential nominees Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have made point after point on why the TPP not only fail, but also harm the

American economy. In this article, I with (TPP or other countries’) forwill focus on how the TPP will fail eign firms’ ability to pay lower wagto meet its goal, hurt the U.S. econ- es, even if the tariffs are eliminated. omy, and give companies the ability to undermine U.S. authority. Although the TPP calls for a raise in the minimum wage, the agreeTo achieve its goal of increasing in- ment’s wording is deliberately amternational trade, TPP proponents biguous. According to John Sifton, boast the agreement’s plan to elimi- the Asia advocacy director with Hunate 18,000 member country tariffs man Rights Watch, “...the document on U.S. goods. This claim, already, does not specify how [the minimum is misleading: While some tariffs wage] should work… [it] could will be eliminated once ratified by be set at a penny an hour—which member countries, the most major wouldn’t do much to help workers.” tariffs (e.g. those on American “Motor vehicles for transport of goods”) Even if TPP countries like Malaywill remain for up to thirty years. sia suddenly did increased their minimum wages tenfold (to be But disregarding this fact, propo- competitive with the U.S.’s), “[t]he nents contend that this would allow missing piece of [this trade deal] the United States to export more is a set of restrictions and/or engoods made-in-America. For exam- forceable penalties against member ple, in 2014, the U.S. exported $56 countries that engage in currency billion in machinery products to TPP manipulation,” according to the accountries. The TPP eliminates import claimed Economy Policy Institute. taxes as high as 59 percent on U.S. The TPP’s failure to regulate curmachinery products exported to TPP rency manipulation leaves a gaping countries. Proponents argue that the hole for other TPP countries’ comTPP, by eliminating tariffs over a po- panies to easily outcompete the U.S.’s. tentially thirty year period, U.S. companies will be able to lower their pric- Furthermore, according to nonprofes and compete in foreign markets. it Citizens for Health, “[the] TPP’s Investment Chapter provides special Although the elimination of tar- benefits to firms that offshore Ameriffs will lower prices of U.S. goods, it ican jobs and eliminates many of the will not make the goods competitive usual risks that make firms think with those of other TPP countries. twice about moving to low-wage According to the nonprofit Citizens countries, such as TPP member Vietfor Health, the “...Trans-Pacific Part- nam... The TPP would require us to nership (TPP) would make it easier waive “Buy American” procurement for corporations to offshore U.S. jobs preferences so that any company opand push down our wages by forcing erating in a TPP country, including Americans to compete with work- all of the Chinese firms in Vietnam, ers in Vietnam who make less than would have to get equal access to U.S. 60 cents an hour and in Malaysia, government contracts. That means where forced labor is widely used.” offshoring our tax dollars to create As U.S. companies simply cannot jobs abroad…” The TPP will not only lower the Federal minimum wage increase U.S. companies’ motivaof $7.25 per hour (which is soon tions to move to other low-wage TPP to be raised), they cannot compete countries, but with U.S.’s restriction

5

on incentivising even domestic consumers to buy American products, more and more American companies will have to choose between going offshore and going out of business.

Unlike those TPP proponents, opponents’ arguments are easily justified with the outcomes of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Entering into force in 1994 amongst Canada, Mexico, and the United States, NAFTA was a trade agreement very similar to TPP, eliminating major tariffs amongst its member countries. In its Congressional ratification process, NAFTA proponents then made the same arguments that TPP proponents do today: that the trade deal would more easily allow the U.S. to export goods.

NAFTA supporters, just like TPP, were dead wrong. After NAFTA went into effect, the U.S. was rendered unable to compete with Mexico’s low wages. In fact according to the Council on Foreign Relations, after the signing of NAFTA, “The U.S.-Mexico trade balance swung from a $1.7 billion U.S. surplus in 1993 to a $54 billion deficit by 2014.” With TPP member countries Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia, and more all having even lower wages and larger manufacturing industries, passing TPP will only steal more jobs from and create larger trade deficits in the United States.

On top of TPP’s inability to increase U.S. competition with other member countries, on top of the TPP’s failure to address things like labor rights (i.e. minimum wage) and currency manipulation, and on top of TPP’s structure that incentivizes U.S. firms to move abroad, the TPP actually creates an investment court system (ICS) that will be the detriment of all member countries. Senator Bernie

Sanders sums up this threat very well: “U.S. sovereignty will be undermined by giving corporations the right to challenge our laws before international tribunals. The TPP creates a special dispute resolution process that allows corporations to challenge any domestic laws that could adversely impact their ‘expected future profits.’[which is the precise wording in the trade agreement]... This process undermines our sovereignty and subverts democratically passed laws including those dealing with labor, health, and the environment… The TPP will allow corporations to challenge any law that would adversely impact their future profits. Pending claims worth over $14 billion have been filed based on similar language in other trade agreements. Most of these claims deal with challenges to environmental laws in a number of countries. The TPP will make matters even worse by giving corporations the right to sue any of the nations that sign onto the TPP. These lawsuits would be heard in international tribunals bypassing domestic courts.” Is that we our great country to do: prioritize profits over people?

Overall, signing the TPP will have the potential to destroy the United States. It would not support U.S. exports, but rather ensure that other TPP countries are better equipped to take U.S. companies, jobs, and wages.

Moreover, the ICS established by the TPP would give multinational companies the ability to undermine U.S. laws and regulations for the protection of their profits. The worst of it all, however, has yet to be mentioned: The TPP lacks an article to leave the agreement, meaning the U.S. would be forever stuck in the nightmare that will be the TPP. So in the end, American companies need to gain the competitive edge they once had

6

in the international marketplace, yes, but the TPP cannot and will not help the U.S. in the endeverance, but rather only undermine it. For this reason, we cannot allow Congress to pass the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Lessons on GMOs Aadi Kulkarni ’18

Last June, as most of America was gearing up for summer, Congress finished up its summer session with the passing of two bills targeting the consumer labeling of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). The House advocated for voluntary labeling and the Senate advocated for mandatory labeling of products. To convulse the whole debate was the issue if a QR code could be used to replace an actual label or if it was just a cover up companies that did not want to admit their use of GMOs. Regardless of the bill passed, the White House has supported the measures that will supercede Vermont legislation that has mandated labeling for all consumer products.

Amidst all this debate lies the underlying question of how GMOs, specifically Genetically Modified Crops (GMCs) are bad. If state governments, two branches of the federal government and most people in the US believe that GMOs are bad then they must be...right?

According to a Pew Research Center Poll conducted in January of 2015 regarding the differences in the Public and American Association for the Advancement of Science Scientist’s views on certain topics. The largest difference in the polls for all subjects surveyed

was the topic, “Safe to eat genetically modified foods”. While an astounding 88% of the scientists believed in the statement while only 37% of US adults believe the same statement. This 51 point gap has some significance and the disparity between the public’s views and scientist’s in concerning. The passing of legislation inherently pushes the idea that GMOs are dangerous and bad for our health but the answer is not that simple. Keep in mind that organisms given hormones and antibiotics are not genetically modified although they may have unknown health effects.

When looking at scientific procedures used to create a GMO and the history of GMOs, one can see how this foreign concept is not so foreign and may be necessary to allow humans to continue to survive. Mouse models engineered for biomedical studies, bacteria engineered to produce medications such as insulin, and crops engineered for agriculture. All of these products of genetic engineering were created using the same basic steps: identifying a trait of interest, isolating that genetic trait, inserting that trait into the genome of a desired organism, and then growing the engineered organism. The part

of the process where the actually transfer of genetic material is where some confusion can occur.

Scientists take a few plant cells and mix them with a special bacterium, called Agrobacterium. The microbe acts a bit like a virus: It injects a little chunk of DNA into the plant cells — which eventually finds its way to the plant’s genome. Since all organisms are built on the same 4 amino acids these bits of genetic material can be taken and used to replace the same bits in another organism giving it those unique traits. This process sounds pretty complicated and it must take a lot of time, effort and resources to achieve right? That is not entirely true, 8,000 years ago without the help of any humans in Central or South America this same process happened with sweet potatoes. Scientists at the International Potato Center in Lima, Peru, have found genes from bacteria in 291 sweet potato varieties, including ones grown in the U.S., Indonesia, China, parts of South America and Africa. The findings suggest bacteria inserted the genes into the crop’s wild ancestor. They have yet to find a variety of potato without the gene to compare to. As our ancestors found these edible plants with puffed up roots, they began to cultivated the best ones and spread

7

them around the world. Sweet potatoes are now the world’s seventh most important crop and people having been eating these GMO’s for thousands of years. All farmers whether tending to backyard potato crops in Peru to mega farms in China are growing genetically modified organisms. Humans in general have also been consuming them for thousands of years without issues.

Scientists are still looking into other crops that may have traits inserted to their genome in a similar way.

“I don’t think that’s all that surprising,” says Greg Jaffe, the GMO expert at the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington.

“Anyone who’s familiar with genetic engineering wouldn’t be surprised that the [bacteria] Agrobacterium inserted some DNA into some crops.” Humans have been eating GMOs for thousands of years and the first ones were created by mother nature, so why do they get such a bad reputation?

This seems to be the misconception that GMOs cause health effects. If we as humans have been eating them for millennia and mother nature can create them, then there does not seem to be a major issue.

To confirm this, Harvard’s Science in the News took up the studies

previously used to “disprove” the safeness of GMOs. The analysis begins with the disclaimer, “knowing who to trust and what to believe regarding this topic is an ongoing battle, major health groups, including the American Medical Association and World Health Organization, have concluded from the research of independent groups worldwide that genetically modified foods are safe for consumers.”

They disprove the major study from anti-GMO group Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), which reported that rats fed a diet containing a GMO potato had every organ system affected after only 10 days of feeding. The IRT said that the toxicity was because of genetic modification techniques and not a specific case for that particular potato. They claimed the process of making the GMO caused it to be toxic and thus all GMOs were high risk for toxicity. The potatoes that were developed with the ability to withstand a specific cocktail of herbicides, were all that was given to the rats and compared to the control rats that received a normal diet. The obvious errors in the methods taken to obtain this data brings doubt to these claims and “evidence” used by many who are against GMO development.

Given the negative stigma that has arisen about Genetically Modified Plants, there does not seem to be much information to support it.

Rather the lack of information and misinformation is provoking these negative ideas. In a future where humans will need twice the food currently being produced to sustain life, with populations and quality of life going up around the globe,

changes are needed to assure that we can continue to support our civilization. GMO’s allow for humans to cultivate crops that can grow faster, healthier, and more efficiently. These traits along with many other studies in agriculture need to be amplified and researched to secure a stable future. Other nations and parts of the world, have taken steps in the opposite direction of the US. The European Union recently opened up its borders to GMO’s.

South America, parts of Asia and Africa have taken steps to allow crops into these areas.

This being said, there certainly are negatives to GMO’s, they can actually be linked to creating super weeds and pests. Due to the high amounts of pesticides and insecticides used in the production GMOs because some have been altered to withstand them, it can force natural selection to occur and in the long term create both insects that can survive these insecticides and weeds that can withstand these pesticides. In the status quo, this issue still exist and GMO’s could only be linked to speeding up the process and are not unique to either situation.

The question of using GMOs has raged for the last few decades, and with advancing technology and growing populations, at some point this technology will be needed to ensure future stability. The real issue from this discussion regarding GMO’s is the stigma around it that is not entirely true. When facts are fictional and agendas are pushed, it create issues with the voices heard from. In turn the government acts to represent those views without

8

much questioning. Having proper transparency on both sides and offering the proper amount of regulation would create a system that would prepare humans and nature for a future together.

The Right to Die

Annabelle Burns ’18 Across the US, freedom is the ultimate good and liberty is deified. Yet one of the most personal and fundamental rights a person has - the right to end his own life - is still criminalized in most states. How did this come to be?

The beginning of laws prohibiting physician-assisted suicide (when a doctor helps provide—not administer—lethal drugs to a patient) is often attributed to biblical and other religious commandments that prohibit killing. From a religious standpoint, physician-assisted suicide is violating the holiness of life. (Strangely enough, this argument holds much less sway in the debate on capital punishment.)

Additionally, the Hippocratic Oath is often cited in opposition to physician-assisted suicide (PAS), as it states, “I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel.” It is important to note that the Oath is no longer in widespread use, and also contains a section condemning abortion, which is another contentious topic. In 1997, the Supreme Court ruled in Washington v. Glucksberg that Americans do not have the constitutional right to PAS, and that its legality should be decided on a state-by-state basis Outside of the US, PAS is legal in Canada, Colombia, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, and Switzerland.

.

Yet the story of John Rehm (late husband of Diane Rehm), who, despite acute suffering from Parkinson’s, was prevented from obtaining lethal drugs, and who consequently starved and dehydrated himself to death, serves to highlight the injustice of the ban of PAS. If someone has the will enough to undergo what is clearly an excruciating process in order to die, rather than continue living in unbearable pain, does it not appear cruel and inhumane to deny them access to drugs that can ease and shorten his or her suffering?

Currently, a patient may request physician-assisted suicide only in Oregon, Vermont, Washington, California, and Montana. Certain conditions must be met: patients must have a less than six-month life expectancy for a terminal illness, and undergo mental health screenings. Multiple requests must be submitted - some orally, some written. The extensive review process seeks to mitigate the risk of rash and inconsistent decisions.

Critics of assisted suicide argue that older patients may still be pressured into committing suicide by feeling themselves a burden to their family, whether financially or emotionally.

However, simply denying everybody the right to choose to end his or her life in a comfortable fashion is not an appropriate response to this issue. Investigating the preliminary results of PAS cases, such as how well the mental health evaluations were conducted and how autonomously the patient reached the decision, may provide insight into the efficacy of the screening process. It is, of course, not possible to ask the patient after the fact, which makes a robust screening process all the more important.

Many institutions that do not allow

PAS do allow patients to choose to stop administration of life-saving medicines. On the one hand, this presents a way to choose to end life in a manner not necessarily equivalent to suicide, making it feel less “wrong.� Yet in almost all cases, doctors are effectively helping patients die, simply in a more uncomfortable and prolonged manner. This suffering could easily be relieved through the administration of quick and minimally painful drugs. The situation begs the question: is a there moral difference between actively helping provide death-inducing medicine and removing life-sustaining medicine, and must we uphold this distinction?

There have, of course, been cases involving patients who had a threemonth life expectancy, who, despite the diagnosis, fought for life and are thriving to this day. Personally knowing someone who made it through a harrowing process only to recover is something that stays with a doctor through his or her career, and undermines the confidence of future diagnoses. As a result, there are a fair amount of doctors working in hematology, oncology and palliative care who oppose the legalization of PAS.

9

We as a country need to put more resources into research and diversification of end of life procedures.

Currently, upward of $50 billion a year is being spent to prolong life, and in most cases neither the patient, the family, nor the taxpayer benefits directly from the care provided.

Between a fifth and a third of these expenditures have no meaningful impact, according to CBS, and many of these terminal patients spend the end of their lives in uncomfortable and astronomically expensive ICUs. Clearly, PAS is not something that needs to be widespread. But instead of extending life to the detriment of many members of society, we must seek to optimize life in other ways and allow each person to end it when he or she feels ready.

Though the feared evil in-laws and dastardly doctors have not yet proven numerous in seeking to exploit PAS, being wary of different types of euthanasia is undoubtedly necessary, as the slippery-slope argument surely has its place in this debate (meaning the possibility of a gradual descent into unchecked killings).

Nonetheless, too often we turn away from seriously considering this complex and perhaps unsettling topic.

Yet, expanding the choices of and when the legislature of Hong Kong knowledge about end of life options decided to undergo an electoral recan only benefit our aging country. form, aiming to bring more democracy to the election for the Chief Executive, similiar to a presidential position, of Hong Kong. One section of the reform that infuriated the Is Hong Kong part of China? eventual protestors was the requireBrian Wong ’19 ment that the candidates for the chief executive election “shall be a person who loves the country and loves Hong Kong”. Firstly, people Who am I? As an international stu- interpreted this as an escalation of dent from Hong Kong, I often strug- the Chinese government’s intervengle with my identity. Questions like tion in Hong Kong politics. Also, it “Is Hong Kong part of China?” or can be inferred that politicians who “Are you Chinese?” are often dif- are not loyal to the Communist parficult to answer. Hong Kong is part ty do not stand a chance of becomof “one-country, two systems;” it ing candidates for the election. For is part of China whilst maintaining the sake of untampered democraits own governmental structures. cy, tens of thousands of protesters, What made Hong Kong different mostly college students and profrom other Chinese cities was its fessors, roamed the streets asking hundred-year-colonization by the for the repudiation of the reform.

British during the 19th and 20th century. During the occupation, a Hong Kong people’s hate for Chiwestern government changed Hong nese mainlanders is not limited Kong forever into a hybrid. Hong only to government and politics; Kong has gained a privilege of a social tensions between locals and unique history that fuses both Chi- the Mainland Chinese are prevalent nese and western traditions. Yet, in in the city. As an international fisuch a fusion, Hong Kong has lost nancial center, Hong Kong attracts a key element of good statehood: numerous mainlanders of various patriotism. Many no longer love social classes. Businessmen come China, feeling disconnected. With to Hong Kong to enjoy the free its democratic government, many trade; housewives come to Hong in Hong Kong dreaded the city’s Kong to purchase daily necessities return to China in 1997, and even because of the high quality of Hong to this day, many still vehemently Kong goods. The daily inflow of fear the Communist party’s author- mainlanders to Hong Kong is conity on Hong Kong politics, leading stantly increasing, hugely affecting to a series of “Anti-China” move- the lives of local Hong Kong peoments. Why do these tensions exist? ple. Mainlanders’ investments in Hong Kong real estate has resultTwo years ago, the Umbrella ed in Hong Kong’s sky-rocketing Revolution sparked the tensions housing prices; their purchase of between Hong Kong and the Peo- milk powder has led to a shortage ple’s Republic of China. It started of milk powder in Hong Kong,

10

their newfound wealth threatens Hong Kong people’s sense of superiority. Conflicts of interest have led to several incidents where Hong Kong people are seen insulting and physically assaulting mainlanders.

They refer Chinese mainlanders people as “locusts”, and they call for a “locust cleansing” act, which stands for getting rid of all the Chinese mainlanders in Hong Kong.

Since Hong Kong is notable to be a free market, the government could not do much to respond to these demonstrations apart from setting some minimal restrictions on mainlanders’ purchase of Hong Kong milk powder. Social tensions remain unresolved and they escalated till the point where some started to call for Hong Kong separatism.

Will this separatism movement resemble the road to Independence of the US from the British in the 18th century? At the moment, I believe that the call for separatism is merely a vocal threat and demonstration to the Chinese government. Hong Kong will not, and cannot become independent. Many factors hinder Hong Kong from forming its independent nation. Politically, the communist party of China still holds too much power in Hong Kong politics.

Firstly, Hong Kong does not have a native army; it is protected by the PRC’s military. Secondly, the leadership positions of the legislature and executive branches are still dominated by mainlanders or people who have strong ties with the Chinese government, so any reforms will be hard to pass. Economically, Hong Kong’s economy is strongly dependent on financing mainland business. Hong Kong built its wealth as a gateway to the

mainland for the west, financing and providing services for entry, should it lose this position, then it will economically face catastrophe.

Socially, mainlanders have already become fully integrated into the normality of all of Hong Kong’s social classes. In fact, some of the Hotchkiss students who reside in Hong Kong actually originated from the mainland.

Despite the fact that Hong Kong separatism is infeasible, it is sad to see hatred build up between two groups of people of the same race.

On a personal level, I am glad that these tensions do not exist within the Hotchkiss community. Distinctions between Chinese and Hong Kong people should not exist, and I hope there will be no rupture in any foreseeable future.

proximately 63.7 million people, attend church on a given Sunday.

Clearly, it wouldn’t be a stretch to NFL Struggles assert that professional football is Sol Broady ’18 ingrained deep within the very naFor more than a decade, the Na- ture of the United States and hearts tional Football League’s growth in of Americans--until now, that is. television ratings and viewership has been seen as invincible. Indeed, The start to the 2016 season has Sunday in America means a battle been an absolute disaster for the for supremacy between God and the NFL. According to a Yahoo/YouNFL’s behemoth package of 1pm, Gov poll, 29% of fans are watching 4pm, and Sunday Night Football less football than normal. Not only games--a fight in which football has has overall viewership declined, actually dominated. Consider this: but individual ratings for games Week 1 of the 2015 football season have plummeted. For example, marked the 6th straight year that 2016’s Week 4 primetime Sunday opening week in the NFL attracted Night Football game between the at least 105 million viewers, or 33% Pittsburgh Steelers and Kansas City of the US population, according to Chiefs was rated 26% lower than Nielsen’s research. To put that into its 2015 counterpart. For networks comparison, the Hartford Institu- such as CBS, FOX, and ESPN, the tion of Religion Research reports news is terrifying--each have struck that only 20% of Americans, or ap- hundred million dollar deals with

11

the NFL, extending their broadcasting rights for years to come. CBS, for instance, relies on NFL games to promote its other shows and simultaneously provide a firewall against a troubling decline of television watchers in the US; its fortune is largely tied to the success or failure of professional football. The NFL’s sudden and unexpected struggles are negatively impacting the players, the teams, the television networks, the television providers, the advertising agencies--the list goes on and on. Naturally, the NFL is on a mission to quickly diagnose and address the cause behind its decline in popularity. Unfortunately, there is yet to be conclusive evidence that there is any one issue responsible; it seems that there are a variety of factors out of the control of the league.

Some contend that NFL’s problem stems from the absurdity of the presidential election which has thrown off ratings and viewership.

It is true that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have provided a spectacle to the American people that even a great football game can struggle to match. During the first Presidential Debate this year, 84 million Americans tuned in, while only 8 million Americans decided they would rather watch the Monday Night Football game that week.

Admittedly, I am a football fanatic who opted to watch the debate over the game--after all, what is one game against a impactful debate which occurs three times every four years? Certainly, the election can be considered a potent competitor to the NFL, and luckily one which will soon subside until the next cycle four years from now.

Others insist that the raising con- Games such as these, which the cern over concussions in football NFL has normally been able to have marred the image of the NFL. rely on to provide excitement and The movie Concussion, starring highlights for weeks to come, only Will Smith, broadcasted the issue exacerbated the frustration viewers of Chronic Traumatic Encepha- are experiencing during the 2016 lopathy (CTE) to Americans in a season. The quality of football play visceral, terrifying way. CTE is a has deteriorated. Furthermore, the degenerative brain disease which retirement of larger-than-life playis induced by the frequent brain ers such as Peyton Manning, Martrauma football players often ex- shawn Lynch, and Calvin Johnson, perience. Concussions have al- coupled with the suspension of ways been a danger to the game, Tom Brady, have taken a significant but with increasing advancements amount of name recognition away in medicine, people are starting to from the game. realize just how dangerous they are.

From 2010 to 2011, USA Football, While legends have walked away a prominent youth football orga- from the game, other players are atnization, reported that nationwide tracting the nation’s attention--but participation declined by 200,000 not for their play. Colin Kaeperkids aged 6-14. Five years ago, the nick’s protests during the national NFL’s ratings seemed immune to anthem has ignited fierce debate the unmistakable fear of football throughout the country on issues engulfing the country. However, regarding race and athlete involveperhaps a trickle up effect has taken ment in social issues. Regardless place--those kids and families who of your stance on the quarterback’s chose not to participate in football actions, here is the reality of the when they were younger have now situation: it is turning away fans grown up, and are naturally not in- from the game. Rasmussen reports terested in watching the sport they that 32% of Americans cite the did not play at the professional Kaepernick-inspired protests as the level. After all, perhaps the games main reason they no longer watch simply have not lived up to ex- games. Remarkably, the number pected standards. Some marquee rises to 53% among Americans 55 matchups, featured during prime- and older. What is it about Kaepertime slots and hyped up endlessly nick’s stance that is so repulsive? through advertisements, have sim- Some believe that it is not the role ply failed to impress. In Week 7, of athletes to express their personSunday Night Football featured the al views during sports games; they Seattle Seahawks and Arizona Car- can save their ideas for press condinals, two perennial powerhouses ferences or personal events. Some and highly popular franchises. What say that Kaepernick should focus was promised to be a thrilling event on the field and regaining his forended in a maddening 6-6 tie, the mer glory before bringing up othNFL’s first in two years. Not only er broader issues. Others believe could neither offense accomplish that while Kaepernick may have a much on the field, but both teams’ point in encouraging Americans to kickers missed chip-shot field goals pay attention to race relations, the

12

act of kneeling during the anthem is inherently disrespectful and wrong.

Still more question his morals and intentions, considering the quarterback often dons socks with police officers portrayed as pigs or shirts endorsing Fidel Castro. While fervent fans are most likely undeterred by the quarterback’s protests, less committed fans would rather tune out the controversial topic entirely.

However, nearly five years have passed, yet we have not yet been able to see considerable improvement in affected areas. The Red Cross, a disaster relief organization, alone raised enough funds to cover the costs of emergency relief. In addition, thousands of donors around the world raised money to exceed emergency needs. The total donations raised was over four million times Haiti’s GDP, but the state of Haiti is no-where near where it should be based on the amount of donations that were raised.

While Haiti has inarguably received some help, the country has not received all the help the funds supposedly promised the Haitians. The question now lies: where did all this excess money go?

It is unclear where the blame lies: it could be in Kaepernick’s civil engagement, Clinton and Trump’s ambition, or Manning and Lynch’s old age. Maybe the football gods decided to curse the 2016 season and order will be restored by next year. But maybe not. The only certainty is that the NFL can ill afford The fingers point towards several a continuation of the start to the organizations, uncovering the reality 2016 season if football is to retain of bureaucracy behind relief funds. its status as America’s game.

The US government and several disaster relief organizations benefited the most from the funds. The money was allocated with a pattern that Bureaucracy Behind Relief would eventually redirect the money to benefit the US. The US govFunds: The Sad Truth ernment dispersed a little over $1.6 Daniel Pai ’19 billion to several departments and government organizations, whilst not even a hundredth of the $1.6 In the winter of 2010, a catastroph- billion could be traced back to Haiic earthquake devastated Haiti. tian government, meaning not even Over 500 000 Haitians were either 1% of the funds raised to help Haikilled or injured, many more lost ti was directly given to Haiti’s govhouses, and most of those affect- ernment. Similarly, organizations ed were left in destitute poverty. like the Red Cross have also mysteriously misplaced the money. The Fortunately, disaster relief organi- money was used for minor failed zations and benevolent individuals projects and other lines of spending all over the world quickly started do- which is yet to be confirmed after nating to help Haitians rebuild their investigation. Ultimately, the orlives. One of the most successful re- ganization failed to use the money lief efforts ever, over $13 billion were to build houses as it had promised. raised for aid in all. Haiti was bound National Public Radio claims that to get back up on its feet: houses the Red Cross promised to build raised, food and clothing distributed. homes for 130,000 Haitians, but

13

only built six permanent homes.

This is a sheer example of bureaucracy at its most corrupt.

The source of failure is threefold.

Disarray.

The unexpected earthquake hit Haiti, and different organizations around the world started to gather donations to help the Haitian government. The following months would be absolute havoc: thousands of organizations would collected billions of dollars for relief. There simply was not enough time to properly organize an efficient plan. Under these unfortunate time constraints, a few organizations like the Red Cross would seize power over all this money.

Distribution.

With the few executive organizations and individuals controlling this money, it is not surprising to discover that the money was poorly distributed. Most likely a problem between contractors and subcontractors, the Red Cross had failed with multiple small-scale projects that were supposed to help the Haitian people. Miscommunication and clandestine stance by the individuals and organizations resulted in poor money distribution that was under the dictation of these few.

Bureaucracy.

Bureaucracy is core. While we cannot neglect the fact that the American government has accomplished endless amounts of good, we cannot deny that the bureaucracy can be misused for corrupt reasons, giving money to organizations that had no relation to the Haitian earthquake.

Five years have passed since the 7.0 magnitude earthquake hit Haiti, and Haiti now faces the aftermath of Hurricane Matthew, where researchers project more than $1 billion will

be needed for relief. We simply cannot allow bureaucracy once again to allocate money to fill up the balance of federal organizations and not help the people who are truly in need.

The AKP and their Purge of Kurds Ian Gill ’19

On July 15 of this year, Turkish government forces suppressed a failed coup allegedly supported by the Gulenist movement. Much attention was paid to Turkey in the days after the coup, where President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan attempted to weed out as many Gulenists from the government as possible. Erdoğan detained over 10,000 soldiers associated with the coup, along with almost 1,500 judges and over 48,000 public servants being dismissed from their positions and over 30 news stations, 45 newspapers, and 29 publishing houses disbanded. Erdoğan has also called for the extradition of Fethullah Gulen from the United States on charges that he orchestrated the failed coup, but not enough evidence has been shown to prove that Gulen had any direct part in the coup. Little attention, though, has been given to the current situation in Turkey, where Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) have expanded the political purges from Gulenists to also include ethnic Kurds.

The Kurds are an ethnic group with a population of about 30 million worldwide, but most live in a region called Kurdistan in parts of Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq, with Iraqi Kurdistan being recognized as an official autonomous region by the

Iraqi government. Kurdistan is secular and pro-Western, which, along with being pro-women’s rights, has made them a target for ISIL, al-Qaeda, and other extremist groups. This is also the reason why many countries, including the United States, support Iraqi Kurdistan and its major parties, the Kurdish Democratic Party and Patriotic Union of Kurdistan alliance (KDP-PUK) with weapons for their Peshmerga fighters and relief. The Democratic Union Party (PYD-YPG) has created somewhat autonomy in northern Syria, and, although they are a communist party, are also supplied by many countries in the west for their part in fighting ISIL and the Assad regime. The PYD-YPG is also seen by many as the political arm of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), a Marxist-Leninist organization denoted as a terrorist group by NATO and EU countries, with Vice President Joe Bidencalling the PKK “a terrorist group plain and simple” (Jan. 23, 2016).

Because of the hundreds of airstrikes that Turkey has executed over Kurdistan, many question Erdoğan’s motives and true enemy in the complex wars in Iraq and Syria. Although Turkey states they oppose ISIL and support in the war against ISIL, there have been less than five Turkish airstrikes targeted at ISIL forces.

Along with Erdoğan’s attacks on the PKK abroad, he has been increasing tensions at home when, on September 8, the AKP removed over 11,000 teachers for advancing the PKK’s agenda, and on September 11, the AKP ousted 24 Kurdish elected mayors for being part of the terrorist group. Both Kurdish political parties and the main opposition to the AKP, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), have condemned the removal of the teachers since no legal process was used to determine their link to the PKK, and the People’s Democratic Party (HDP), a legitimate pro-Kurdish party, stated that the purge of 24 mayors would leave an unrepairable divide between the Since 1978, Turkey and the PKK Turkish government and the Kurds. have been fighting, both in Turkey and in the surrounding area, with the In conclusion, the PKK is a terrorist PKK barricading roads in southeast organization that has killed civilians Turkey and killing Turkish officials through suicide bombings and shootand with the Turkish government ings. However, they, along with their sending troops to southeast Turkey assumed ally, the PYD-YPG, are viand bombing PKK camps in Syr- tal in the fight against ISIL, with the ia and Iraq. Turkish airstrikes have Kurds being some of the most sucproven to be extremely unreliable, cessful fighters in the region. Turkey where an airstrike on August 1, 2015 has continued to fight two wars at on the Kurdish town of Zergaly the same time in the tangled alliance killed eight civilians, three of them structures in the Middle East, against being related to a fighter for KDP’s the Kurds and against ISIL, but it Peshmerga, not the PKK. Al- seems to many that the war against though the area around Zergaly is the spread of autonomous Kurdistan known as a refuge for PKK fight- is more important to Erdoğan than ers from Turkey, from the over the war against ISIL. Turkey must 1,000 airstrikes targeted at PKK stop with the unsuccessful airstrikes fighters in the region, only seven in northern Iraqi Kurdistan, and must PKK militianen have been killed instead focus as much power as posin all. (Continues on next page.) sible to join the efforts of coalition

14

forces against ISIL. Also, Erdoğan’s removal of the Kurdish mayors, many of whom received over 80% of the vote from their constituents, for leaders who were not elected continues to erode the trust between the Kurds in southeast Turkey and the Turkish government. Even if the Democratic Regions Party (DBP) mayors were connected to the PKK, a Turkish diplomat believes that “the state should seize every opportunity to force a party with more than 10% of the vote into the legitimate realm” (Al-Monitor, September 12, 2016). By bringing a political party into the legitimate realm instead of the realm of terrorism, both the

argues that the northern areas and Kashmir, with its 99% Muslim population, are part of its country, India has laid claim to the entire state. With the help of the UN, the two countries were able to come to terms of a ceasefire in 2003, but tensions have recently escalated again (Rashid, Financial Times). With over seventy years of tension between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir Region, India needs to cede parts of the troubled region in order to promote more political stability and economic prosperity within the country.

On September 18, four militants, angered over India’s actions in the province, raided the Indian Uri Base

Kurdish political parties and the Turkish government can hope for a positive change. Also, many see that the dismissal of the mayors will lead to further distrust in the Turkish democratic system, strengthening the idea in many Kurds for separation from Turkey even through violence.

in Kashmir and killed 18 Indian soldiers; in retaliation, the Indian army issued “surgical strikes” over the border that killed two Pakistani soldiers. Additionally, Indian Forces have caused over 80 civilian deaths since July through trying to control protests from the citizens of Kashmir Valley fighting for their independence (Staniland, The Washington Post).

Minister Narendra Modi to focus more on economic development, one of his major goals for this term, and less on defense of a controversial region. Less money would be needed on this troubled state, and this money could be reallocated for improving economic development to decrease poverty throughout the country.

There would also be greater geopolitical stability in the area because the Pakistani and Kashmiri forces would have the land with no further need to fight, but Indian forces could still protect the concern of national security through bases at Jammu and Ladakh to protect Indian civilians from potential attacks aimed for

the nation’s capital New Delhi and the heart of India. This geopolitical stability would also put Indian and Pakistani allies, the US and China respectively, at ease, important because, if India and Pakistan had “an exchange of 100 weapons (less than half that of the existing Indian and Pakistani arsenals) [it] would not only kill 20 million people within one week, but ultimately put some Tensions in Kashmir The best solution for all parties in- two billion people at risk worldwide” Priyanka Kumar ’18 volved is to declare Kashmir Valley (International Physicians for the Jammu and Kashmir are states in an independent country and cede Prevention of Nuclear War, 2013). northern India boredered by Chi- the Northern Areas to Pakistan. This na and Pakistan. While Pakistan solution would allow Indian Prime Geographically, this is the best op-

15

Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia).

tion for India and Kashmir as well.

Despite concerns of India losing its main water supply from the Indus River, keeping Jammu and Ladakh as Indian states would still allow hydroelectric power and water to be collected from the parts of the Indus River that run through the region.

According to BBC, the Kashmir Valley would also be able to support itself as an independent nation through agriculture due to the large rural areas within the valley and the water supply from the Indus Valley.

Ceding parts of India would stop these human rights violations and allow many of the northern Muslim populations to join Pakistan, which would end protests and ease tensions between the two religious groups.

within the area. According to the LA Times, over 47,000 civilians and police have been killed in the territory since 1989, and India has been criticized for its excessive use of force with Kashmiri protesters by Human Rights groups. Since July, more than 570 civilians, including children, have been treated for blindness and extensive injuries due to Indian security forces’ lead pellets (Bengali, LA Times). According to the Washington Post, the Kashmir crisis has led to many Hindu nationalists framing the overwhelming Muslim majority of Kashmir as Islamist fanatics.

than good, so all sides need to come Colombian government as part of to the table and resolve this issue to the ongoing Colombian armed conbenefit all parties before the situa- flict. In its wake, the group has left tion escalates to a point of no return. over 200,000 dead and millions displaced. A peace deal was negotiated between the two sides to end Colombian Peace Deal such brutality, which offered amAnton De Lesseps ’18 nesty to ordinary fighters and imposed only minor restrictions upon and required community service of The October 2, 2016, Colombian those who admitted to serious war peace agreement referendum would crimes. The agreement also granted have ended 52 years of violence be- four legislative seats to FARC leadtween the Colombian government and ers in the 2018 presidential election; the FARC—Revolutionary Armed this would transform the group into

However, as promising as the treaty’s terms seemed, it would have conceded too much to the rebels and, quite possibly, FARC political involvement would have altered Colombian government into some form of a dictatorship. The voters were justified in rejecting the peace deal, but the Colombian government still ought to strive for peace with the FARC rebels.

India needs to end the idea of refusing to give territory to their enemy and instead analyze the bigger picture, where they would see that ceding land would benefit India as a whole. The recent cancellation of the South Asian leaders summit hosted in Islamabad, a major Pakistani city Most importantly, this solution next to Kashmir, is derailing progSince 1964, the left-wing guerwould ease rising tensions between ress; Keeping Kashmir as part of an Muslim and Hindu populations Indian state only causes more trouble rilla group has fought against the

16

a political party, thereby giving it supported the peace deal, FARC greater power to assert itself from would have been able to assert itwithin the Colombian government. self from within the Colombian government, which could have The prediction for the referen- had quite deadly effects. Allowing dum outcome was that 66 percent FARC to become a legitimate politof voters would vote for the peace ical party would give it the ability deal. However, by a narrow mar- to undermine the Colombian govgin—50.2 percent against, 49.8 ernment and to affect its decisions percent for—the Colombian vot- and actions, not just to resist it as a ers rejected the peace agreement. separate entity. In this way, a part of Immediately, many claimed that the peace agreement reached by the this did not properly reflect the two parties could have been very opinions of the Colombian people, deadly to the security of the Colomthat a variety of factors may have bian government if put into effect. skewed the vote; but, by reviewing the terms set forth in the agreement, The Colombian voters have reone finds it easy to understand jected the proposed peace agreewhy so many Colombian vot- ment, but the Colombian govers rejected the peace agreement. ernment and FARC still ought to strive for peace. Justice must be First is the concept, supported by served to the rebels for their crimes President Álvaro Uribe, that the committed against the Colombian peace deal did not punish enough people, and such a guerrilla group a violent group that had caused so must not become a legitimate pomuch bloodshed and fear through- litical party with the ability to afout the 52 years of its existence. fect the government from within.

As previously mentioned, the only With these necessities in considretribution that higher-level FARC eration, President Santos ought to officers would endure would be continue collaboration with FARC restrictions on movement and re- to achieve peace in Colombia. quired community service. Rankand- file fighters would not be punished at all. To those who voted against the peace agreement, these minor sentences did not suf- Against Drug Legalization ficiently compensate for the proMichael Li ’18 longed suffering of the Colombian people at the hands of the rebels.

The dispute over drug policy has A more threatening aspect of the become a hotly debated political peace treaty was its promise to topic, starting with the legalizaFARC of four legislative seats in tion of marijuana in Colorado and the 2018 election. Before the trea- Washington on November 6, 2012. ty, FARC was an outside force in Just this month, California legalrelation to the Colombian govern- ized recreational use of marijuament, and it was fought against as na. Many states are following the so. However, if the referendum had trend of legalization, yet others still

17

staunchly stand against legalization, and some stand on the verge of decisions. But should we loosen drug policies? Which drugs should be prohibited and which should legalized? Current drug policy reform only pertains to the decriminalization of marijuana in certain states. Yet Colorado and Washington have set a precedent for the liberation of other narcotics. This precedent is not one that should be followed, for the legalization of all drugs will lead to widespread use of harmful substances that may lead to a breakdown of the social order.

Drugs are inherently harmful substances, capable of significant mental and physical damage. For this reason, the prohibition of drugs can be seen as a shield. As Drug Free Australia puts it, “the use of illicit drugs has been prohibited... because of international agreement that the general community has a greater right to protect itself from the harms of illicit drug use than does an individual user to use a harmful substance recreationally” (Drug Free Australia). To attest to the damage caused by drugs, the National institute on Drug Abuse states that “The impact of addiction can be far reaching” (National Institute on Drug Abuse). The side effects include cardiovascular disease, stroke, hepatitis, cancer, HIV/AIDS, all of which can cause death. Most important to note is that these effects not only occur at high drug doses or prolonged use, but can also occur after a single use. They are harmful to the point that today, “there are more deaths, illness, and disabilities from substance abuse than from any other preventable health condition.” In

fact, this statistic has been growing at a shocking rate. According to Penington Institute, in 2014, a total of 47,055 drug overdoses occurred in the U.S., the highest number than in any year on record. This possibility of damaging long term effects, specifically the risk of death, does not outweigh the short-lived high one may feel from drug usage. So from this, it seems reasonable that such prohibitive drug laws are passed to protect us from ourselves.

Drug prohibition is actually quite effective at deterring illicit drug use. In a study conducted by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 29% of those who had never used cannabis cited its illegality as their reasoning behind non-use. While 19% of those who stopped using cannabis also cited prohibition as their reason. Because of the illegality of these drugs, people are scared to abuse due to potential repercussions. Think of the drug laws as the rules within the school almanac. Can it not be seen that most people in the school do not use due to the severity of punishment if found abusing prohibited substances? Imagine if you were to be kicked out of society when discovered in the possession of narcotics, would you take the risk then? Other factors of prohibition also contribute to low use of illicit drugs. According to the director of the US Office of National Drug Control Policy, Drug laws keep drug prices high, helping to keep use rates low “since drug use, especially among young people, is known to be sensitive to price.”

terrorism. Much of these drug related incidents are not so much because people want to buy drugs, but rather because they are under the influence of drugs. In a 2004 survey of inmates, 32 percent of state prisoners and 26 percent of federal prisoners said they committed their offences under the influence of drugs, while 17 percent of state prisoners and 18 percent of federal prisoners said they committed their offence in order to obtain the money to buy drugs (Drug Enforcement Administration). Even if legalized, drug-related crime would still not cease to exist, rather it may even increase. It is quite self-explanatory. If narcotics are legalized for people over 21, there will be a large market for people below that age, supplied by a legalized source for the substance. However, continued prohibition seems to be a better solution to tackle narcotic-related crimes. Admittedly the “war on drugs” will never be won, there will always be drug-related crimes.

Yet, the constant policing of illicit drug use, like the policing of speeding, does have a great effect on reducing drug related crime.

In the end, the prohibition of drugs is, and has been, greatly effective in preserving the health of individuals and the wellbeing of society as a whole. By restricting drug use, people are dissuaded from using in fear of the consequences. As such, users, specifically younger and less developed users, will not be exposed to the harmful effects of substance abuse. Meanwhile drug-related crime, which can account for quite a substantial percentFinally, prohibition has been age of crime, can be driven down. linked to reduction in crime and

18

On the Legalization of Marijuana Andrey von Emme ’18

Should we legalize marijuana? With the recent debates over the recreational use of this drug, the media has been discussing the pros and cons of legalization.

In this debate many have overlooked the benefits of legalizing other drugs of the same or lower classification of potency as marijuana.

The benefits of legalization include: an improvement in regulations that will ensure the safety of users, significant economic gains in new sources of taxation revenue, and a major decrease in the crime rate. All the listed benefits greatly outweigh the dangers legalization will bring.

The legalization of drugs will allow strong regulations by the government which will improve the health and ensure the safety of potential recreational drug users.

True, the creation of government regulation will not give marijuana health benefits. The legalization of drugs will make drugs safer anless harmful to use for drug users are currently unable to verify the contents of their purchase and have no guarantee of safe ingredients.

With the legalization of all drugs, the FDA would be able to regulate the product, monitor production, and prevent the use of dangerous ingredients such as bleach in cocaine. Such regulation would significantly improve the health of all drug users and reduce the overdose

risk by decreasing concentration.

Legalizing marijuana would allow the government to tax the multi-billion dollar recreational industry which can be used to create jobs and spur economic growth. The United States Federal Government currently spends exorbitant sums on the enforcement of its prohibition and financing the war on drugs, costing the federal government 12.7 billion USD just in 2016 alone. The government would lose such a large drainage of funds and in fact be able to gain $46.7 billion annually if they legalized marijuana and created taxation (CATO). Colorado, one of the first states to legalize marijuana, has already seen massive economic boosts,collecting $63 million from taxation of the drug which could be used to finance public initiatives (Colorado.gov).

Marijuana is a crop, and allowing it to be an industry will have a positive effect, presenting opportunities for banks and others entities such as retailers or convenience stores to employ more people in producing, selling, and transporting marijuana. A legal drug industry will bring vast economic benefit with the collection of taxes and job openings.

to utilize the courts and the public justice system, thus many times the conflicts are resolved with violence and murder. he legalization of drugs would solve the problem by ridding the catalysts of crime The industry would be overtaken by large pharmaceutical companies that utilize legitimate practices. Since the vast majority of people would prefer to buy from a shop than from a street corner, the black market would be deprived of profits and be forced to disintegrate. Crime rates would go down and the quality of life of both drug users and inhabitants of drug prevalent area would increase.

The use of drugs by underage people would decrease; legal drugs would be better regulated through official outlets and thus be better prevented from sale to underage users. Overall the crime rate would decrease and use of drugs by underage people would decrease as well.

Lastly, the legalization of drugs will dismantle the black market and thus decrease the rate of crime. An industry does not disappear when its product is deemed illegal— instead it shrinks and forms an underground, black market. Black markets fuel crime for they rely on secrecy, intimidation and fear to operate and thus are massive catalysts for murder, theft and other crimes. In illegal drug deals, neither the producer or seller is able

While it is unlikely that the war on drugs will end anytime soon, we can see steps be taken to move forward during the current debate on the legalization of marijuana.

There is more to be gained by the legalization of drugs than there is to be lost. The benefits of the end of the prohibition are the decrease in crime rate, the regulation of product and a large economic boost, all of which are to be considered against the risks of legalizing drugs.

19

The Hotchkiss Review

Editors-in-Chief: Miranda Triedman ’17, Max Li ’17, Jesse Godine ’17 Faculty Advisor: Mr. Adam Lang

Domestic Editors: Bobby Doar ’18, Nick Fleisher ’18, Annabelle Burns ’18

International Editors: Ian Gill ’19, Jack Kreisler ’17, Aadi Kulkarni ’18

Chief Staff Writer: Tatiana Whitman ’18

Chief Staff Artists: Daniel Lee ’17, Wan Lin Qin ’17 Cover Art Credit: Meyer, Franz Sales Handbook of Ornament (New York, NY: The Bruno Hessling Company, 1904)

20

The Hotchkiss School 11 Interlaken Road Lakeville, Connecticut