VROP Spring 2023 Print Edition

SPRING 2023 | VOL 1 | ISSUE NO 01

VIRGINIA REVIEW OF POLITICS p's m Tru pact d i d im y w c o n h ide da? s a e r n p Ca

underst and a Iranian nd support women

why we should recognize Puerto Rico as the 51st state

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17

WINTER IS COMING...

James Galvin

GENDER NORMS: WHO WINS?

Maura Nacey

CONGRESSIONAL INACTION FORCES THE SUPREME COURT INTO THE FIRING LINE

Eli Blaufuss

OUTSIDE SPENDING HAS CORRUPTED OUR ELECTIONS

Eli Mautner

FASHION POLICE!

Kiera Chambers

BREAKING THE BINARY

Bhavyasri Suggula

PUERTO RICO: POWERLESS IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE

Lukas Barragan

IS TRUMP’S BRAND OF POPULISM CHANGING CANADA?

Thomas Baxter

ABOUT THE ISSUE I am so excited to share the newest print edition of the Virginia Review of Politics! As our first print issue in several years, we wanted to showcase the current state of the magazine, and the excellence of our writers and editors. Therefore, this issue features some of the best articles our organization produced in the Fall 2022 semester. Within these pages, you will find thorough analysis on a variety of subjects. Read about global news and transnational interactions in James Galvin’s article on international support for Ukraine, Bhavyasri Suggula’s analysis of Western perspectives of recent Iranian protests, and Thomas Baxter’s explanation of populism in Canada. Dive deeper, and there are articles regarding the role of government in different aspects of domestic politics, such as the outsized role of the Supreme Court because of congressional inaction by Eli Blaufuss,

how outside spending can influence elections and the government at large

by Eli Mautner, and how the federal government ignores Puerto Rico by Lukas Barragan. Finally, we have some very interesting pieces of cultural analysis, such as a piece on the role of gender norms by Maura Nacey, and Kiera Chambers’s article on fast fashion and its effects on the environment. The wide range of issues explored in this magazine showcase one of the major strengths of VROP: the freedom staff writers have to explore and write about the issues that matter to them. We’re excited to continue to provide a space for young writers to develop their ideas and voice for years to come.

You can visit our website, virginiapolitics.org, to view our most recent articles. They won’t disappoint!

Sofia Heartney Editor-in-Chief

Staff Executive Board (F22) Editor-in-Chief, Sofia Heartney Managing Editor, William Ham Operations Manager, Charles Campbell

Executive Board (S23) Editor-in-Chief, Sofia Heartney Managing Editor, Claire Satterfield Operations Manager, Charles Campbell Interviews and Features Editor, Anoosha Murtaza

View the current masthead on https://virginiapolitics.org/masthead Produced by Emily Chen and Sofia Heartney

2

Winter is Coming...

But for Russia Too Due to fundamental Yet even if Europe misunderstandings of the were to fall into significant war in Ukraine and the economic turmoil, it’s economies involved, unclear if that would lead to Western media and analysts a loss of support for Ukraine, have consistently predicted or be consequential for disaster to come for Ukraine Ukrainian ability to and the West this winter. continue fighting. The most “Europe’s Coming Winter frequently cited weakest link Peril” was the head-line the in Western European Economist ran for its July support for Ukraine is Italy, 16th, 2022 issue, predicting especially due to the late a devastating energy crisis in September election of hardEurope and collapse of right Prime Minister Western support for Giorgia Meloni. Meloni’s Picture credit: https://www.stettlerindependent.com/news/ukraine-strike-on-russian-territoryUkraine. In late August, coalition includes Forza reported-as-talks-resume/ Italia, a party led by former Prime Minister and avowed CNN warned of a harsh winter that would split apart the Putin admirer Silvio Berlusconi. Yet Meloni’s own feelings West and potentially doom Ukraine. They joined a sea of on Russia appear to be much less sympathetic, and she has other publications anticipating a damaging winter to come pledged to support Ukraine. Additionally, given Italy’s for Ukraine and its Western backers. However, these meager contributions to the Ukrainian war effort thus far, a gloomy predictions of the future for Ukraine and the West drop in Italian support would have little effect on the war in are cemented in faulty analyses of the realities of the EU, Ukraine.

Ukrainian and Russian economies, and changing A similar conclusion can be drawn for Germany, a international support for Ukraine and Russia. The reality is powerful European economic force but a lagging that devastating effects of the winter for Ukraine are contributor to Ukraine. Other nations, especially Poland and overstated, and the effects for Russia are understated. the Baltic states, see the war in Ukraine as an existential crisis A central driving force behind concerns about the and will continue supporting Ukraine. Although the United coming winter center around European energy availability Kingdom is undergoing considerable leadership turmoil, and costs. After Russia’s gradual shutdown of the Nord support for Ukraine remains incredibly popular and aid will Stream 1 Pipeline and the onset of EU energy sanctions, continue no matter who is in charge. Ukraine’s most European nations which were once heavily reliant on important backer is the United States, whose support will Russian energy have had to contend with its sudden absence. not waver as long as Joe Biden is in office. As long as Surprising many, Europe effectively addressed the potential American aid continues—and even potentially without it— crisis through cooperation and decisive action. European Ukraine can keep fighting effectively. leaders in early summer set a goal to fill gas reserves to 80% The economies of the EU are not the only concern; by the end of fall. Europe succeeded fantastically, and by many analysts worry that Ukraine’s economy is another October 1st had filled reserves to 86%, a number which will serious risk heading into the winter. Ukraine’s overall continue to rise before the beginning of winter. European economy will have contracted 35% before the close of 2022. nations currently pay an average of €300-€500 per This is a serious loss of GDP, but when considering roughly megawatt-hour, a number that Goldman Sachs expects to one-fifth of Ukraine is under occupation, the contraction is fall in 2023 to “100 euros per megawatt-hour in the less bleak. Furthermore, economic collapse for warring first quarter.” This data suggests that the European energy nations is most consequential when it destroys industrial crisis is largely exaggerated. A heavy winter could exact a capacity, meaning the loss of GDP is less significant for considerable economic toll on Europe, but not a devastating Ukraine, who gets its industrial capacity from the West. Due one. Moreover, the EU appears adequately prepared for a to this, Ukraine is better insulated from the effects of standard European winter.

3

economic collapse than virtually any wartime economy of the modern era.

Although Ukraine’s economic and international support picture is much more resilient than commonly believed, the same cannot be said for Russia. Although not immediately obvious, Western sanctions and export controls are exacting a significant toll on Russian ability to fight effectively in Ukraine. Export controls have decimated Russian ability to procure computer chips for advanced weapon systems, leading to mass shortages in precision guided missiles.

Export controls and economic slowdown have also severely degraded Russian tank production. Construction of lethal next generation T-14 Armata and T-90 tanks have all but ceased. Russia has even been unable to replace losses for its T-72 model, a late Soviet-era tank which it employs frequently in Ukraine. Instead, the Russian military has had to turn to stocks of T-62 tanks, which was first introduced in the 1960s. This puts Russia at near-parity with the Ukrainian tank fleet, who also operate old Soviet models like the T-64.

The economic concerns for Russia do not stop with battlefield capabilities. According to a Yale University study led by Professor Jeffrey Sonnenfield, the Russian economy is much worse than commonly believed, and rapidly declining.

Russia enjoys widespread shortages on commonly imported goods and the loss of its strong position as a commodities exporter. Russian domestic financial markets are the worst performing domestic markets of 2022 despite significant Kremlin intervention.

The true impact of sanctions will be increasingly felt

by Russia as more time elapses, and its economy will continue its path to a devastating collapse. This will most likely occur after the coming winter, but the persistent movement towards collapse will weigh heavily on Russian morale.

Morale will also be impacted by the growing isolation of Russia in the international arena. At the outbreak of the invasion, Russia enjoyed tacit support from many nonWestern nations, who trumpeted anti-Nato talking points and voted down pro-Ukrainian UN resolutions. As the war has dragged on, Russia has seen its tacit support slip. China has privately expressed concern about the war and in discussions with EU diplomats they no longer blame the war on NATO. Of course, talk is cheap, but China has continued to resist sending weapons to Russia even as its struggles mount on the battlefield.

As Russian losses have mounted, atrocities come to light and irresponsible nuclear rhetoric has increased, other neutral nations have begun to show discontent. India has put out more pro-Western statements, including Prime Minister Nehrenda Modi’s public comment to President Putin that “today’s era is not an age of war.” India has also increasingly looked to move away from purchasing military hardware

from Russia and move towards purchasing from the United States. Both China and India continue to take advantage of cheap Russian energy exports, but weariness towards the war is evident, and growing.

An early October UN Security Council motion decrying the Russian annexation of Eastern Ukrainian territories received just a single no vote, Russia. Even North Korea, long considered the most politically isolated nation on earth, published a statement denying weapons sales to Russia. Iran, who has supplied many of its Mohajer-6 and Shahed armed drones to Russia, faces a potentially destabilizing domestic crisis of its own. If anti-regime protests continue to pick up steam, even Iran’s support could come into jeopardy.

The degradation of Russia’s domestic military production capacity and worsening battlefield outcomes have meant that even the recently announced mobilization cannot change Russian military fortunes. Newly mobilized Russian troops are receiving 1-2 weeks of training before being sent to the front. Needless to say, this is not nearly enough to prepare soldiers for the frontlines, even if they are former servicemen. The downsides of this hasty mobilization are evident: newly mobilized troops have already been captured by Ukrainian forces.

Even if Russia intended to give its troops ample time to mobilize, it’s unclear if it would make any difference. Early on in the war, the Russian military sent its officers and noncommissioned officers (NCOs) in charge of training to fight on the frontline. Now, nearly all are still fighting in Ukraine, dead or captured. In a rush to prevent mobilization, Russia doomed its success.

Historically, winters have rarely been good for invading armies. The once invincible armies of Napoleonic France and Nazi Germany met the beginning of their respective downfalls in brutal Russian winters. The USSR itself saw defeat against a much smaller Finnish force during the Winter War of 1939. If Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires, winter is the season of burial. Many in the West have begun to realize the potency of a winter for a military military force, subconsciously associating its onset with impending defeat. As the cold approaches, it’s important that the West recognize which nation is the empire headed for disaster, and which is the defender who stands to benefit from it. Europe will survive a nonapocalyptic winter and the potential for loss of aid to Ukraine is inconsequential.

The Russian economy is much worse than commonly assessed and will only continue to get worse. Where Ukraine sees an economic light at the end of the tunnel in victory, Russia sees continual descent into financial darkness.

Mobilization will do little for battlefield performance and its international backing is weakening. When the snow begins to fall this winter, the West must not give in to defeatism and instead realize the true potential for Ukrainian victory.

By James Galvin Staff Writer ‘26

4

Gender Norms: Who Wins?

When it comes to sexism and gender norms, it’s simple to point fingers at men.

What if it’s not that easy in reality?

“Men are the worst.”

To begin, masculinity “Boys will be boys.” should be viewed as a sort of “All men…” double-edged sword. Men Statements like these are rewarded for their are some of the easiest to masculine presentations and make, written out in a benefit from their perceived matter of seconds, spoken gender, whether they are with a few simple syllables. aware of it or not. However, They get a shared laugh and simultaneously they struggle maybe a sigh. They’re under the pressure of popular hashtags that masculinity, something that circulate every so often, entails suppression of making light of a complex emotions, fear-based issue by feminists, moms, homophobia, and a lack of social justice warriors intimate connections with Picture credit: https://unsplash.com/photos/VEpNYUq0vJg (SJWs), and men alike. their loved ones, all of which lead to a quality of life that is unsustainable.

While it’s certainly easy to share these sentiments and make A common response to this argument may very well be that men out to be the enemy, statements like this are inherently “women have it so much worse,” but it’s not fair to compare problematic. They serve to draw attention away from the in this way. A man shouldn’t have to prove that what he’s real issue at hand—that masculinity forces men to act in going through is painful in order to get pity and he certain ways, and punishes them when they do not. This shouldn’t be told that he needs to suck it up because women issue goes much deeper, entailing thousands of years of are more disadvantaged. Yes, women are the historical and sexism and gender discrimination being simplified into present victims of sexism, and yes, women continue to fight something that paints an easy target: men collectively. these pressures. However, the bottom line is that these Instead of viewing men as the source of all evil, we should struggles shouldn’t be pitted against each other where one instead strive to understand that men operate under the same clear winner gets all the sympathy. No one wins where gender pressures women do, regardless of whether or not compulsory gender conformity exists, not even men. Gender they benefit from those pressures. norms, to put it eloquently, suck.

Instead of viewing men as the source of all evil, we For men, one of the most dangerous norms to which should instead strive to understand that men operate they are told they must adhere is being unemotional. From infancy, boys are taught it’s unmanly to cry. They’re ‘babies’ under the same gender pressures women do, regardless or ‘s*ssies’ if they show they’re in pain. Men are constantly of whether or not they benefit from those pressures. being negatively reinforced for every show of emotion they make, transforming them into someone who no longer Before my plea for men begins, I would like to knows how to show real emotion. This pressure is one acknowledge the elephant in the room, or rather, the which has real, deadly consequences for men. Data collated women. History is populated with the efforts of women by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention trying to fight for equality, grasping at any semblance of reported that “in 2020, men died by suicide 3.88x more than equality, only to reach for more in a never-ending pursuit. women.” This is clearly a cry for help and a sign of I’m not here to deny that women have been stomped on by desperately needed change. the world for the majority of their existence, nor am I going to argue that women are not still getting discarded and Data collated by the American Foundation for Suicide having to fight for every inch of ground. I promise that no Prevention reported that “in 2020, men died by suicide spitting on the work of feminists or women alike will take place. I simply want to offer the idea that maybe men are 3.88x more than women.” This is clearly a cry for help suffering in some of the same ways women do.

and a sign of desperately needed change.

5

There is, however, one exception to the ban on emotionality for men, which is anger. The stereotype of a dominant, aggressive, and career-driven man is one which lends itself to the idea of manly rage. When a boy is told the only emotion he should feel is anger, he becomes a man who can express only resentment and fury. Boys are aided in their efforts to fit this mold with toy guns, dangerous sports, and video games filled with normalized violence. Their

When men are taught the only way they can express themselves is by harming others, we all suffer because of it. infant anger turns into aged violence, which eventually manifests in the form of harming others, sometimes in irreversible ways. Statistics from the Bureau of Justice Statistics show that “while about three-fourths of the victims of family violence were female, about threefourths of the persons who committed family violence were male.” When men are taught the only way they can express themselves is by harming others, we all suffer because of it.

The question then becomes, what to do with this information or where the answer to all our gender problems might lie. Unfortunately, I can’t offer a cookie cutter answer. Gender socialization is a terrible, widespread cultural phenomenon which cannot be taken on alone or dismantled in one swoop of a sword.

Saying otherwise would be falling into the same vein of ignorance that points towards men being the problem for everything, rather than the greater scheme at work—gender expectations which constrain everyone. My first word of

Think back—can you remember the last time your dad cried? What about your mom? If you’re like me, you can’t recall your father, or your brother (past puberty of course) ever crying, but can remember the last time your mom cried. advice would be to start small. Talk to the men in your life.

The men who suffer from masculinity pressures are not some statistic. They exist around you and a lot of them are hurting, without anyone to share their struggles with. Think back—can you remember the last time your dad cried? What

about your mom? If you’re like me, you can’t recall your father, or your brother (past puberty of course) ever crying, but can remember the last time your mom cried. Further, there’s a lot of promise in male-led groups which not only allow, but encourage men to share their emotions and feelings about the pressures of masculinity. Would I encourage you to join the Men’s Rights Movement? No. Unfortunately, this group seems to be more focused on bashing women and swearing that men are the only ones who are suffering from sexism, which is the opposite of what we as a society actually need. However, groups that do strive to give men the support they so desperately need are

Picture credit: https://unsplash.com/photos/r1OQfUIw3ns

ones I foresee as being a first step towards real change. A Call to Men, an organization offering programs, educational material, events and more might be a good place to start.

The bottom line is that men and women need each other. Making each other out to be the enemy is consistently counterproductive and creates division at a time when unity is essential. Both parties are constrained by gender conventions in many ways that are so similar, despite them being so often postulated as opposites. Taking the time to recognize that men are being socialized to reaffirm their masculinity is half of the battle. Holding onto past resentment is only going to push us backwards. It’s time to recognize that men are not the end-all be-all for our problems and maybe, just maybe, they too want change and freedom from gender pressures.

By Maura Nacey Staff Writer ‘24

6

Congressional Inaction Forces the Supreme Court into the Firing Line This November’s them are ceremonial rather midterm elections have than substantive. For become part of a disturbing example, from the 107th trend; instead of elections Congress to the 111th being a strict battle over Congress (2001-2010), policy, they include a battle 2,215 pieces of legislation over the judiciary. In 2018, were enacted, and about the confirmation of Brett 26% of those bills were Kavanaugh to the Supreme ceremonial. From the 112th Court increased enthusiasm to the 116th Congress for Republicans, and a (2011-2021), just 1,696 Supreme Court vacancy in pieces of legislation were 2016 rallied GOP voters to enacted, and about 26% of support then-candidate those bills were ceremonial.

Donald Trump. Political From the 112th to the 116th Picture credit: https://unsplash.com/photos/U8WfiRpsQ7Y focus on the nation’s Congress (2011-2021), just 1,696 pieces of legislation were enacted, and about 33% of judiciary during this election cycle is due to a string of them were ceremonial. Congressional inaction has had a recent landmark decisions from the nation’s highest court, number of consequences, with much focus being drawn which have reminded Americans of how powerful an towards the growth of presidential power. Equally upsetting institution the judiciary is. to the American political system has been the politicization These recent controversial court decisions are due in of judicial power. Political actors, such as state attorneys part to a coordinated effort by Republicans to maximize the general, understand that Congress is becoming increasingly number of conservative judges within the nation’s judicial ineffective as a legislative body, so they seek to achieve system. During the Obama administration, Republicans paid victories by using the nation’s courts. particular attention to the ideological composition of the The push for same-sex marriage rights is a perfect nation’s judiciary, blocking a number of Obama’s Court nominees. This effort culminated in the GOP’s refusal to act Equally upsetting to the American political system has upon Obama’s nomination of now-Attorney General been the politicization of judicial power. Political Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court following the death actors, such as state attorneys general, understand that of Antonin Scalia. Once Republicans gained control of the Congress is becoming increasingly ineffective as a White House and Senate in 2016, they immediately pounced at the opportunity to fill seats they blocked during the legislative body, so they seek to achieve victories by Obama administration, confirming new judges at a recordusing the nation’s courts. pace. Adding three justices to the Supreme Court, the example of the Supreme Court handling an issue that Trump administration delivered the conservative Congress failed to address due its ineffectiveness. In 2015, Republican focus on control of the judiciary did not the majority of states had legalized same-sex marriage, a clear sign to Congress that taking action to create a develop in a vacuum. Instead, it is part of a larger nationwide right to same-sex marriage would have been in story of Congressional inaction. line with the views of the American people. Instead of Congress taking action, political actors, such as the ACLU, supermajority that Republicans had long hoped for. worked to force the issue before the Supreme Court, which Republican focus on control of the judiciary did not declared a constitutional right to same-sex marriage in its develop in a vacuum. Instead, it is part of a larger story of Obergefell decision by a slim margin. Now, the Obergefell Congressional inaction. For the past several decades, decision is back in the spotlight as Justice Clarence Thomas Congress has been passing fewer bills each session. Of the wrote in his concurring opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson that the few bills that Congress does pass, an increasing proportion of Supreme Court “should reconsider all of this Court’s

7

substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” Had Congress acted before the Supreme Court, instead of now scrambling to codify samesex marriage rights, Thomas’s calls to reconsider Obergefell would carry little weight. In the course of acting on issues that Congress should have dealt with, the Supreme Court is

Picture credit: https://unsplash.com/photos/pCJ42rXtbe0

facing questions about its legitimacy as an institution and increased calls for reform. Instead of Congress codifying the right to an abortion in the past 49 years, conservative states forced the issue before the Supreme Court. In Dobbs v.

Jackson, the Court delivered a decision that has sent shockwaves throughout the nation and caused public trust in the Supreme Court to collapse. A Republican-molded Supreme Court is returning decisions that are at odds with public opinion, such as by limiting the power of the EPA to regulate emissions or blurring the separation of church and state. Increasingly unpopular, it now faces calls from Democrats to expand the Court and pack it with their preferred nominees, similar to Democrat efforts to reform the Court in the 1930s. The Supreme Court faces a difficult situation. They are forced to act because issues unaddressed

by Congress are instead appearing on their docket, and when they do act, they are returning decisions in line with their judicial philosophies that are nonetheless unpopular with the public.

The Supreme Court is uniquely weak compared to the other two great powers in American politics.

Constitutionally, Congress has the power of lawmaking and the president has the power of enforcement, while the Court is a check on the powers of both. However, the High Court is vulnerable to the whims of both entities. If the Court runs afoul of Congress and the President, they can restructure the Court to their liking as the Constitution fails to outline the Supreme Court in great detail. Therefore, the judiciary maintains its legitimacy and avoids restructuring by being perceived as a body above typical partisan politics that delivers impartial decisions. The Supreme Court has walked this fine line for decades, avoiding court packing and enabling themselves to perform their constitutional duty of checking the other two branches. The recent Democratic push to pack the Court would destroy its legitimacy, as Republicans would simply do the same if returned to power

in the White House and Senate. No longer would the nation’s highest court be a body insulated from partisan disputes, it would instead be yet another battlefield in the fight between Republicans and Democrats.

In order to preserve the sanctity of the Supreme Court, Congress must take serious steps to regain its ability to be a productive deliberative body. Congress is not short of ideas on how to improve the country, but the Senate filibuster stands in the way of ambitious policies. With the current 50-50 divide in the Senate, amassing the 60 votes needed to end a filibuster is a nearly impossible goal. The filibuster has also seen increased use in the past two decades, blocking any real legislative action. As previously mentioned, Congress is now taking action to defend same-sex marriage rights after the Dobbs decision, but the Senate filibuster has forced Congress to postpone the issue till after the midterms in attempt to secure the necessary Republican votes to pass the bill. Instead of settling with inaction, Congress should instead dismantle the filibuster and act to protect the basic rights of the American people. Had Congress removed the filibuster prior to the Dobbs decision, Congress may have been able to codify reproductive rights and neutralize the impact from the Court’s decision. Ending the filibuster is being actively contemplated in the Senate, and taking action against it would create a more dynamic Congress, where both parties could more easily score legislative victories and lessen reliance on the Supreme Court to meet policy goals.

In a normal political environment, the focus of voters should be centered on what representative they want to elect to an efficient and ambitious Congress. Instead, voters

Picture credit: hhttps://unsplash.com/photos/XWW746i6WoM

are focused on the Supreme Court, which seems allpowerful in comparison to our lethargic and stagnant Congress. Bypassing Congress and politicizing the Supreme Court is creating a crisis of legitimacy which may very well destroy one of our nation’s most important institutions. The only way to save the judiciary as we know it is for Congress to step up and legislate by eliminating the filibuster and opening the pathway for real action by our nation’s elected representatives.

By Eli Blaufuss

Staff Writer ‘24

8

Outside Spending Has Corrupted Our Elections Reigning in sources of dark money is key to citizens maintaining control of our democracy.

The 2022 elections are anonymous funding, on track to shatter record nonprofits are starting to levels of spending in a flex their muscles in midterm year. Total elections. In the 2020 expenditures in federal presidential election, the top elections are projected to top 15 Democrat-aligned $9.3 billion. For context, political nonprofits spent adjusted for inflation, the $1.5 billion, while the top 2018 midterms saw $5.7 15 Republican-aligned billion in spending, and nonprofits spent $900 2014 had $3.8 billion. As million. These nonprofits spending continues to rise outraised the presidential each cycle, it is increasingly candidates themselves. important to understand In 2020, a conservative where all this money comes nonprofit called the Marble Picture credit: https://sp.depositphotos.com/stock-photos/dinero-sobre-la-mesa.html from. So far in this election Freedom Trust scored a $1.6 billion donation from electronics manufacturing mogul cycle, 1,407,016 unique donors have contributed over $200 Barre Seid. Seid's gift was the largest donation ever given to to federal candidates, political action committees, parties, and a political nonprofit and could serve as a preview of what is outside groups. However, a growing portion of donations to come based on current trends in outside spending. $1.6 comes from corporations, individual super donors, Super billion is an absurd amount of money to be at the disposal of PACs, and untraceable donations. This outside spending a political nonprofit. This gigantic donation gives them the presents a unique threat to our democracy. Mega-donors capacity to influence elections and policy for years to come. pouring money into outside organizations are gaining The Marble Freedom Trust will be able to fund local, state, influence over elections and legislation. Citizens and the and federal elections, shape public opinion, fund think tanks, media should shine a light on these new spending methods and influence the appointment of judges. While this to hold politicians accountable. donation was originally made sometime in mid-late 2020, As outside spending has become prominent in our Seid’s identity was only revealed in August 2022 after elections, Super PACs have led the charge. Over twoinvestigative journalists traced the origin of the money thousand political groups organized as Super PACs have through various tax documents and campaign filings. We raised a total of $1.69 billion for the 2022 midterms. Super now know the origin of this massive donation, but there is PACs are political action committees that are allowed to raise nothing to stop the next one from being anonymous. Seid unlimited money from corporations, unions, and individuals. has a history of making generous donations in complete Super PACs avoid the rule that nobody can donate more privacy, and weak campaign finance laws have given people than $2,900 to a single political candidate in each cycle by like him more legal avenues to make anonymous political not technically coordinating directly with any party or contributions. candidate. While they are required to disclose where their money comes from, they often list corporations or shell Mega-donors pouring money into outside corporations that make the true source of the donation organizations are gaining influence over elections and unclear. legislation. Citizens and the media should shine a Outside of Super PACS, nonprofit organizations are exerting their influence on our elections. Spending from light on these new spending methods to hold these groups is labeled "dark money" because they are not politicians accountable. required to disclose their donors' information. Anonymous Outside money did not always have such a central role donations open the door for wealthy actors to interfere with in elections. As recently as 2010, total independent judicial independence or for foreign interests to funnel expenditures totaled only $71.6 million. Just two years later, money into American elections. Armed with unlimited and

9

outside spending shot up to $442 million. This drastic change was no coincidence. Outside spending was ushered into American politics following the landmark supreme court decision of Citizens United v. FEC. In 2008, a conservative nonprofit group named Citizens United challenged the Federal Elections Committee’s campaign finance laws after the FEC forced them to remove an attack ad against Hillary Clinton because it was too close to the presidential primary. Two years later, a 5-4 Supreme Court decision declared that corporations and other outside groups could spend unlimited money on elections. The majority opinion argued that limiting

Picture credit: https://magazine.ucdavis.edu/what-can-we-learn-from-the-midterm-elections/l

spending from outside groups violated the first amendment right to political speech. This decision assumed that spending would not be corrupt and would instead be transparent. As we have seen the influence of mega-donors and dark money, it is clear that assumption has turned out to be far from true. This is not how democracy is supposed to function.

This unlimited, opaque funding structure gives immense power to the ultra-rich in selecting political candidates and, ultimately, the policies that get passed. For races in the House of Representatives, the candidate who raises more money wins 90% of the time. Money correlates with winning, but it is also true that winning attracts money, as donors seek to influence politicians in office. In 2018, Republican politicians were open about donor pressure to pass tax cut legislation. Republican Congressman Chris Collins said, "My donors are basically saying, 'Get it done or don't ever call me again.'" Senator Lindsey Graham echoed Collins, saying, "The financial contributions will stop" if they failed to pass the tax cuts. Money and special interests have always had a disproportionate influence on American politics, and allowing unlimited and anonymous donations exacerbates the problem.

Both parties are at fault for exploiting this system.

Money flows into both Democratic and Republican causes at almost equal rates. However, significant differences lie in how politicians talk about Citizens United and unlimited election spending. Republicans have championed the system, whereas Democrats have largely argued against it.

That raises the question: Is it better to openly support a corrupt system or criticize it while simultaneously benefiting from it? To the Democrats' credit, they have begun to offer solutions. For example, Democrats in Congress are pushing to pass the DISCLOSE Act, which would strengthen disclosure and disclaimer requirements.

The act would legally require any organization spending money on federal elections to disclose their donors who give $10,000 or more. While the legislation advanced through the House, the Senate has been unable to pass the law without support from a single Republican.

There have been other recent attempts to stop the influence of outside spending in our elections. For example, Representative David Price’s Stop Super PAC-Candidate Coordination Act sought to limit Super-PACs ability to work directly with candidates, and Representative Katie Porter’s Foreign Political Influence Elimination Act of 2021 tried to broaden the prohibitions on foreign-affiliated corporations participating in our elections. Both of these bills failed, and there is no clear path toward any reform in the near future. Unfortunately, incumbent politicians lack incentives to vote for laws that directly hurt their chance at re-election. The system is self-reinforcing as wealthy donors help elect candidates who will then protect the wealthy donor’s influence by allowing them to continue pouring money into their future races. Since reform is unlikely to originate from within Washington, pressure must mount from the outside.

Incumbent politicians lack incentives to vote for laws that directly hurt their chance at re-election. The system is self-reinforcing as wealthy donors help elect candidates who will then protect the wealthy donor’s influence by allowing them to continue pouring money into their future races.

As the ultra-rich get a hold of our political process at every level, the average person’s influence shrinks. To hold our politicians accountable, we must know who is funding them. To ensure politicians represent all their constituents, not just their top donors, outside spending must be limited.

If politicians are unwilling to make these reforms on their own, public pressure must build to pass them. Organizations like End Citizens United are organizing to take big money out of politics. Their message is clear: democracy is not for sale.

By Eli Mautner

Staff Writer ‘25

10

Fashion Police!

Fast Fashion and Its Inevitable Environmental Demise Picture this: you head clothing every 5.5 days. out for a simple day at the With pressure now more library, and you head to than ever to stay up to date your favorite spot, latte in on trends, and to replace hand. You decide it’s time to your wardrobe for every start studying, so you open season, Americans are more your Quizlet set. Suddenly, likely to do what they know you have been bombarded: a best: consume. Fast fashion Lululemon ad on one side, has created a culture of an Adidas ad on the other. A clothing consumption in Shein ad cycles through the which clothes are worn out top layer of your notecards. easily.

Before you know it, you According to a 2017 find yourself surfing the Ellen MacArthur web, scrolling through Foundation report, if fast Picture credit: https://unsplash.com/photos/cfDURuQKABk pages and pages of clothing. fashion continues to function the way it currently does, then the rate of carbon Innocent enough, right? Not exactly. I’m not saying emissions from the industry could reach up to 26% in 2050. indulging in online shopping is wrong, because if so, take The rise of carbon emissions leads to a rise in greenhouse me away Officer! I’m saying that buying without knowing gasses which could lead to extreme weather events, food what you’re buying can be damaging to your style, the supply shortages, and no more dinner parties to wear your economy, and, perhaps most dire, the environment. Fashion clothes! production makes up over 10% of global carbon emissions.

So what does this mean for us? How are we going to Not to mention that over 50% of materials used by the continue in a fast fashion economy with a deteriorating fashion industry are made of microplastics. These environment? microplastics eventually are released into the ocean, The short answer is: we’re not. This April 2020 report damaging natural ecosystems and harming the habitats of calls for a systemic adoption of slow fashion: a transition that many animals. would include manufacturing innovation, reworking the I’m saying that buying without knowing what you’re consumer’s understanding of fashion, and introducing textile recycling to the process. All of this sounds incredibly buying can be damaging to your style, the economy, complicated and unattainable for just one person. So when it and, perhaps most dire, the environment. comes to buying clothes, how can we be more conscious consumers, aware of the fast fashion industry functioning This is a direct result of the rise of fast fashion. Fast around us? fashion is a manufacturing method used to produce high volumes of clothing cheaply and quickly. Its harmful effects Though it should not be up to individual consumers to have only been realized very recently, as it was initially challenge the fast fashion industry, companies and thought of as an equalizer for consumers, allowing them to corporations will likely prove to be ineffective in afford the newest clothes for the lowest prices, across all social classes. In today’s society, most young people have enacting change. heard the term fast fashion in some context. But what has Though it should not be up to individual consumers to failed to be understood is its environmental damage and challenge the fast fashion industry, companies and limited economic benefit. corporations will likely prove to be ineffective in enacting Our current economic system of capitalism has proven change. Shein is a perfect example of this, as they are labeled intrinsic to fast fashion. According to an April 2020 report an “Ultra Fast Fashion” company, a company that uses fast entitled “The Environmental Price of Fast Fashion”, the fashion at an even higher rate than most business models. average American consumer now purchases one item of

11

Though Shein is typically considered affordable and trendy, individual, unique, and never before seen, than go to the thrifting has risen in popularity because of practices of mall to get the same outfit as their peers. upcycling and environmental consciousness.

Fashion, as we understand it today, is an expression of In order to maintain its Ultra Fast Fashion business model, oneself through clothing. It can be artistic, risky, Shein has become the hub for promoting ultraconsumption. With the rise of 600-dollar “haul” Tik Toks jarring, pleasing, trendy, and so much more. Fast and influencer partnerships, Shein has maintained its success fashion calls for the rapid examination and updating as a brand despite having allegations of unfair child labor and of one’s style, whereas slow fashion calls for the loading thousands of unnecessary styles on their website understanding of fashion as functional. each week.

Here comes the hard truth of slow fashion: the idea of For younger generations, secondhand fashion has fashion must be completely reworked. Fashion, as we become perceivably better than brand new styles. According understand it today, is an expression of oneself through to the 2019 State of Fashion Report, “Environmental clothing. It can be artistic, risky, jarring, pleasing, trendy, sustainability has become a significant priority influencing and so much more. Fast fashion calls for the rapid the shopping choices of young consumers”. examination and updating of one’s style, whereas slow I am no saint. I have surely purchased something that is fashion calls for the understanding of fashion as functional. a product of fast fashion. I have certainly hurt the This is not to say abandon all fashion creativity, but that our environment with a purchase. But I’m working now on clothes should last longer, be “trendy” for longer, and shopping sustainably, whether it be at my local Goodwill, provide the same satisfaction for longer. It’s either this online on Depop or Poshmark, or from local consignment realization or facing the dreary reality of climate change stores. What’s important now is that we learn about the which, to me, is worse than one bad outfit. effects of our clothing choices, the sources of our clothing, There is a light at the end of the tunnel. Thrifting has and what we as consumers must know to purchase recently replaced Shein hauls and Tiktok buys as a means of consciously and sustainably. acquiring trendy styles. Gen Z would rather find something

By Kiera Chambers Staff Writer ‘25

12

Breaking the Binary A Story of Iranian Women In mid-September, Mahsa Amini faced a tragic death, causing civil unrest in over 50 Iranian cities.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini's rise to power after the Islamic Revolution of 1979 symbolized the start of repression of women with the enactment of mandatory hijab/chador laws. Since the revolution, women have protested and encountered severe violence, burning their veils as a symbol of their desire for choice and freedom. The current Iranian government crafted the Gashte-Ershad, the morality police. The morality police monitor and arrest those who fail to promote virtue such as following the Islamic dress code, with a focus on women in recent years. Mahsa Amini fell prey to the morality police, having been arrested and beaten to death for wearing her veil “improperly”. Her death in September of 2022 unveils significant historical connections and prospective political implications.

Western, mainstream news sites and social media portray Amini’s death as a result of an oppressive religion named Islam, continuing the binary equating “hijab” to “lack of freedom” and “no hijab” to “freedom.” Much of this narrative is also exacerbated by the lack of information directly from Iran due to internet blackouts hosted by the government. However, the construction of this binary suppresses the voice of Iranians who are actively displaying their discontent with the whole regime due to the decades of repression by the Islamic Republic. This binary creates a reductionist view of the political, social, and cultural nuances behind Amini’s death. Although society constantly separates events and issues into two polarizing sides, international solidarity and aid to the Iranians require the recognition of Islam both as a religion and as a political tool. It is necessary to see beyond the binary, beyond the notion that the hijab and the religion are what Muslim women need “saving” from.

It is important to note that these protests are not a “Free Women from Islam” movement; they are a movement to free Iranians from an Islamist government. Islamists

13

constitute a separate cohort of Muslims, seeking to merge the religious and political spheres and entertaining the notion of political Islam. With the goal to uphold Islamic “sharia” law, Islamists utilize democracy as a tool to advance their religious agendas.

Recently, renowned professors from George Mason University, the University of Austin Texas, Picture credit: C.Suthorn/cc-by-sa-4.0/p7.ee Northwestern University, and many other institutions engaged in a talk. Titled “In Her Name,” the talk was conducted by Jadaliyya, an ezine, or online magazine, under the Arab Studies Institute. The discourse centered around contextualizing the current protests within the broader scope of transnational feminist movements across Iran, as well as political and cultural shifts across Iranian history which enhance the narrative of the protests. The panelists note explicitly, basing their reasoning on personal anecdotes and research on the intersectionality of gender and violence, that the Iranian Constitution, legal codes, and parts of the Quran actually advocate for gender equality. For example, Article 11 of the Iranian Constitution states that the regime needs to ensure the equality of women and men in all aspects in accordance with the Constitution.

With the facade of democracy and misuse of political institutions, the Iranian government has distorted the presence of Islam within society.

Women also faced severe restrictions beyond hijab/chador laws. Since the Iranian Revolution of 1979, women were forced to leave crucial government positions, had their access to education and work restricted, and were barred from entrance to sporting events. These restrictions were implemented due to the changing political structure and the culmination of decisions by both political and religious groups. Utilizing the political structure, the recent government implemented the morality police, which has led to protests by Iranian youth. All of these protests unify their grievances which were revealed throughout previous protests.

The fight for women’s right to bodily autonomy and freedom within Iran has become the center stage of a

broader issue of long-term ethnic oppression. The woman's body is and has been the launchpad of past and present movements. Amini’s death prompted women, ethnic minorities, and many others to speak against the government. Over the past five years, Iran has experienced a multitude of protests mainly led by the youth against corruption, unemployment, labor, water, food prices, lack of representation, a weakened economy and welfare state, and increased government repression. Global media should focus on how the fight demonstrates the intersectionality of the religious, social, economic, and political factors within Iran’s government—not just the hijab. The morality police and increasing violence surrounding the hijab served as the match in the powder barrel; although the reasons for protests had been different since the Iranian Revolution, the diversity of protestors at the scenes displayed by the media reveals their grievances from the restrictions imposed on the socioeconomic well-being of Iran. Iranians are standing up, and reducing the protests to Islam or the hijab as the oppressor removes years of history and nuances present within the underlying crackdown by the Iranians.

Such narratives also separate Iranian women from the overall population, emphasizing the notion that they are severely oppressed and their rights revolve solely around the hijab. Iranian women are just as impacted by high rates of unemployment, as they are barred purposefully from certain government or high-ranking jobs. Iranian women are just as impacted by the rise in gas prices, losing money to the hands of the government for the treasury. Iranian women are just as impacted by the rising corruption within the political structure, being unable to choose their representatives as new political officials are pre-determined by existing officials. Elections are a political weapon to establish a facade of democracy. Separating the voices of Iranian women from the other protests which have intertwined the various aspects of the Iranian regime erases their participation as a citizen and emphasizes the dichotomy of gender. Although it is necessary to emphasize the role of restrictions on women and how gender (specifically the binary of men and women) affects social and political dynamics, we must avoid reducing women’s role in politics to this narrow scope. Non-hijab protests are vital to recognizing women’s sovereignty and autonomy as citizens. The death of Amini is a symbol of the larger issues present within the regime. This is how we should portray solidarity and support for Iranian women: by opening the current narrative and conversation to historical nuances. We need to remove their position as solely the subaltern or a voiceless group. In reality, these women have a huge impact. We need to recognize their presence and that they are subject to more secular issues.

Cultural awareness is integral to creating change. We can not move forward nor enact necessary change if we do not take the required time to learn the facts of the case.

Certain events aren’t meant to be taken at face value, as we

see within the headlines or short social media posts.

Moreover, the context in which we live impacts how we view issues. The US and Iran have various parallels. For example, for many years, especially since 9/11, we have viewed Islam as related to terrorism and oppression. We consider the hijab as a form of oppression. In Iran, they could also view us as oppressive since we frown upon the hijab, discriminating against Muslim Americans within the country. It’s all a matter of perspective. Moreover, there is no outright denial of the hijab; it boils down to the idea of freedom and choice in when to wear it and if it will be worn as consistently as the morality police and Iranian government expect.

Another parallel is the idea of systemic oppression which exists in both countries but in different contexts. A popular and relevant example would be police brutality.

Within the United States, police brutality and systemic oppression have been prevalent since the late 19th century, targeting minorities and immigrants; police have gone from particularly raiding homosexual bars in the mid-1900s to attacking African-Americans for simply taking late-night walks in recent years. Within Iran as well, modesty police have been instituted to target particular groups, mainly women who are not following the dress code. Many have reported stories of being arrested for their physical appearance such as wearing lipstick or improper shoes even before the modesty police were formally instituted, revealing the existence of implicit restrictions sustained since 1979. Despite exemplifying distinct forms of government, both systems retain brutal records of police action, often oppressing a minority group.

Recognizing context and perspective will allow Western media and society to stray away from the notion built since 9/11 that Islam is dangerous. The use of Islam within political institutions is what is actually dangerous.

The rising ignorance of the cultural phenomena and current events within Iran when viewing Amini’s death is dangerous. The lack of intervention or condemnation by other nations is dangerous. Splitting any issue into two parts is a great way to start with learning the facts of the case; we can’t stop there as it is a reductionist outlook. We must branch each part again into different perspectives, forming a tree of perspectives and nuances of the information we have found. That is the first step to enacting change and showing international solidarity with the citizens of Iran. This isn’t a fight against religion, but rather against the entire regime.

To display our support for Iranian women, we must remove the narratives and correlation between women and the hijab, turning the conversation into recognizing other social, political, and economic factors which affect women.

We must acknowledge them as equal citizens with rights.

We must acknowledge their story and voice, not just what is portrayed by reductionist sources of media and stereotypes.

By Bhavyasri Suggula Staff Writer ‘26

14

Puerto Rico: Powerless in More Ways Than One When Hurricane Fiona “administration of struck Puerto Rico in midgovernment and justice, September, the entire island according to Anglo-Saxon faced a disaster that was principles, may for a time be dismally familiar for its impossible.” Despite the residents. Roads and bridges obvious prejudice in the were destroyed, houses were Court’s reasoning, this status flooded, and hospitals has remained over a century struggled to keep patients since its decision, and it has alive whilst attempting to resulted in multiple troubles bring their power back on for the island. For example, after an island-wide up until just earlier this year, blackout caused by the the Puerto Rican economy storm. This all came nearly had been in absolute five years after another shambles. Following the Picture credit: welcome.topuertorico.org/img/gi-flags.png tropical storm, Hurricane Great Recession of 2008, Puerto Rico’s debt had skyrocketed, owing over $74 billion Maria, devastated Puerto Rico, leading to many migrating to various authorities. Due to a set of laws made in the midto the US mainland while those that remained had to deal 80s, the Puerto Rican government was barred from applying with the fallout. As the Puerto Rican and American for bankruptcy, meaning they can only acquire more and So, rather than allow this depressing system to more debt. Said debt caused many Puerto Ricans to leave for perpetuate further, the US and Puerto Rican the mainland in search of better work opportunities, with the island experiencing a loss of over 400,000 residents in the governments should formally organize an attempt at years between 2010-2020. Those who remained, meanwhile, establishing Puerto Rico as the 51st state of the had to suffer the consequences of a disastrous economy, such United States of America. as the shutdown of multiple schools and a poverty rate of over 43% of the population. governments go through the process of reconstruction, now Should the US admit Puerto Rico into the Union, the would be a good time to raise the question of whether or not island would finally receive assistance for many of its issues, this current system is working. including its economy, medical system, disaster relief, and As an unincorporated territory, Puerto Rico doesn’t lack of voting rights or representation for its citizens. The receive the benefits of statehood, such as stronger economic Puerto Rican government would finally be able to register protections, increased medical care funding, better disaster for Chapter 9 bankruptcy and start restructuring its relief, or even the right to vote in US elections. This status economy, as the laws preventing it from doing so only has resulted in lackluster reconstruction efforts and frustration by residents of the island. So, rather than allow Should the US admit Puerto Rico into the Union, the this depressing system to perpetuate further, the US and island would finally receive assistance for many of its Puerto Rican governments should formally organize an issues, including its economy, medical system, disaster attempt at establishing Puerto Rico as the 51st state of the United States of America. relief, and lack of voting rights or representation for its Ever since the United States acquired Puerto Rico citizens. following the Spanish-American War, the island has been applied to territories. It would also receive increased labeled as an “unincorporated territory” meaning that it is on funding for programs such as medical care, as their current no path towards statehood. This status was decided in a series program for Medicaid has a fixed cap that’s much lower than of Supreme Court cases known as the Insular Cases, in that of states. which the island was described as being “inhabited by alien Statehood could also be a benefit in terms of disaster races” and was considered to be a place where

15

relief for Puerto Rico. While the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) doesn’t necessarily have a set amount of funding for providing aid to each state or territory, statehood would provide stronger incentives for Congress to react whenever a disaster hits the island. When Hurricane Irma hit Florida in late 2017, much more funding and resources was spent relieving Floridians than was spent helping the Puerto Ricans when they were hit by Hurricane Maria just two weeks later, despite Maria causing much more damage overall.

Congress would gain that perspective with statehood because the status change would also mean that Puerto Rico

Picture credit: https://unsplash.com/photos/zq08xWkBgsI

gets representation in the legislative branch. Despite it being part of our country for over a century, the island gets no voting representatives in Congress, and its residents aren’t allowed to vote in presidential elections despite being US citizens. By admitting Puerto Rico into the Union, however, not only would its residents finally receive a voice in our government but they’d finally be able to partake in voting rights that have been kept from them for too long.

But with all of the benefits that statehood would provide, there is still some pushback to the idea. While some argue for a perpetuation of the current status of unincorporated territory, another alternative with strong support on the island is the call for complete independence from the United States. Citizens in Puerto Rico who support independence argue that the US government has already caused enough issues for Puerto Rico, and thus Puerto Ricans should be wary of any proposal of statehood, as it could cause more harm than good. They believe that the United States has been dismissive of the island’s issues as a territory in the past and that statehood wouldn’t change this, or could make it worse. Supporters of independence also argue that statehood could cause an erasure of Puerto Rico’s distinct culture and identity, as more Americans moving into the island could cause said identity to become lost and diluted in the American melting pot.

While there are definitive merits to the call for

independence, statehood is the better alternative overall. It would result in a much more stable method of improving Puerto Rico’s economy than should it go on its own, and it would mean much more coverage from other issues as well, such as medical care or disaster relief. The island’s separation from the contiguous United States, along with its status as a territory, create both a physical and political disconnection between the Puerto Rican and US governments. This disconnection causes the US government to prioritize issues affecting the states rather than issues affecting the island, much to the detriment of its residents. Statehood could thus provide stronger reasoning for why Congress should help more when the island is hit by a natural disaster. As a state, it wouldn’t be seen as just some foreign land that was struck by a hurricane. It would have representatives and senators to speak out and help us see that it's a part of our Union that’s been severely hurt and needs our support.

Whatever alternative you prefer, the fact of the matter is that the current system is not working, and the longer we ignore that fact, the worse it’s going to get for Puerto Rico when another hurricane comes through. One important first step to solving this issue is by passing H.R. 2070, or the Puerto Rico Self-Determination Act. This bill, introduced in the House last year, would provide Puerto Rican citizens with the opportunity to vote on whether they’d like to keep their current system, become a state, or become fully independent from the United States. While this may not sound like much, it would go a long way to finally providing a solution that has gone ignored for decades, and it would give a voice to all sides of the issue. It is also binding to the United States, meaning Congress, regardless of the results, has to actually respond to and act on them.

While the bill has not received much attention since its introduction in the House last year, with the recent

By admitting Puerto Rico into the Union, however, not only would its residents finally receive a voice in our government but they’d finally be able to partake in voting rights that have been kept from them for too long. destruction to the island caused by Hurricane Fiona, now would be an opportune time to raise awareness of it and pressure Congress to help provide a voice to millions of American citizens who have previously been left silenced.

Puerto Rico, in more ways than one, has been trying not to sink for the past several years. Now is the time to finally throw them a lifeline.

By Lukas Barragan

Staff Writer ‘24

16

Is Trump’s Brand of Populism Changing Canada?

From January 22 to measures that required February 23, 2022, the masking in public places and world took notice as vaccination in order to Canada’s capital was overrun return to work in most by a so-called “Freedom businesses. The mandatory Convoy,” a massive street vaccinations also extended demonstration that shut to truckers, as they routinely down Ottawa’s downtown cross the Canada-US border core. Though it ultimately and move between cities. failed in its goal to disrupt Truckers bristled, saying the federal government, the that by its very nature, stunning act of civil trucking is an isolated disobedience clashed with vocation with little chance many outsiders’ views of of becoming vectors of the Canada as a country with a disease. As many Americans Picture credit: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mostlyconservative/3088109885/ content and docile and Canadians grew weary of COVID-19 interventions, those libertarian views became population. Internally, many Canadians were likewise a staple on Canadian social media. surprised by the protest’s size and effective organization. It Over the Christmas holidays in 2021 and with the had started as an angry statement by a small number of omicron variant beginning to take hold, the Trudeau independent long-haul truckers, frustrated by the Liberal government announced new, more stringent vaccination government’s COVID-19 vaccination requirements on requirements for the transportation sector. When a group of them. Unexpectedly, it exploded when thousands of other angry truckers announced they would head to Ottawa to Canadians with myriad grievances joined them to confront a stage a protest and took to GoFundMe to raise funds for gas government that had only three months before been reand accommodations, the response was overwhelming. elected, albeit with a minority in parliament and with only Quickly, social media algorithms allowed echo chambers to 32.6 percent of the popular vote. form, resulting in a huge protest that brought almost anyone Though mostly harmless, save for the noise and some with a grievance against the federal government to Ottawa minor vandalism, the convoy represented a significant under the banner and protection of the truckers. change in Canadian politics, worrying many moderates who As it grew well beyond the organizers’ expectations, feared that Canada was falling victim to populist pressures there were widespread instances of misinformation and farakin to those seen in the United States during the Trump right conspiracies. American influence was clear, as one presidency and in subsequent state races. walking the street would see almost as many American, such The month-long standoff on the streets of a G7 capital as Tea Party and Confederate, flags as Canadian ones, touched off copycat protests in other parts of the world. It showing a surprising amount of influence from American was a culmination of many issues in Canada relating to populism in Canadian politics.

COVID-19 policy, in which Prime Minister Justin Trudeau When Donald Trump was elected as President of the and his government had taken aggressive (and largely United States, many Canadians worried that similar successful) action to combat the spread and collateral damage populism would spread beyond the U.S., but very little of COVID-19. This approach had spared Canada the same changed in Canada during the Trump years. When Trump kind of carnage seen in the United States, where nearly 1.1 left the White House, most Canadians welcomed a return to million had died. By contrast, Canada had seen normalcy. Even during the pandemic, competence and calm approximately 46,000 Coronavirus-related deaths. But was seen as paramount, allowing Trudeau to win re-election Canada’s success had come at the expense of some personal for a third time. That was until the convoy and its aftermath, freedoms. which showed many Canadians that their country was not From the earliest days of the pandemic, a large majority of Canadians were generally supportive of the restrictive

17

immune to the spread of populism and the social-mediafuelled divisions that come with it.

The size and tenor of the convoy protests caught many off guard, including even many conservatives, who had sought to toe the line between championing individual rights while also heeding the more than 80 percent of Canadians who, at the time, supported requirements for vaccination. But one enterprising conservative politician saw it as an opportunity to topple the Conservative Party’s leadership and make it his own: Pierre Poilievre.

Despite having a French name, Poilievre was born and raised in Western Canada, a deeply conservative area, and has long had a reputation as an angry, divisive politician. In opposition, he was known widely as one of former PM Stephen Harper’s most ruthless political attack dogs. In government, as a cabinet minister, he was considered competent and willing to champion unpopular legislation.

With Ottawa in gridlock last January, Poilievre unabashedly marched with the protesters, exalted them to continue to shut down the capital, and seized every opportunity to criticize Justin Trudeau and his Liberal government on social media. Throughout the convoy and in the immediate aftermath, Poilievre developed a huge following on social media, that he then used to propel himself to the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC). While the next federal election is still three years away, Poilievre is now positioned to challenge Justin Trudeau, or whomever replaces him at the Liberal helm.

Many Canadians are ambivalent about Poilievre, ready for someone new but fearing that he is drawing too freely from the populist movements that have risen to prominence around the world. Having endured two attempts by Quebec to separate from the rest of Canada, Canadians have generally shied away from politics that are radical and divisive. Indeed, at all levels of government, Canadian voters have generally favored more moderate platforms. In borrowing much of his rhetorical flair from Donald Trump and his acolytes, Poilievre appears to be bucking conventional wisdom, even though his policies, particularly in areas like immigration, appear relatively conventional compared to those of other populists. Poilievre’s politics have a traditionally conservative platform, flecked with libertarian accents and delivered with populist rhetoric. This rhetoric is what is worrying most Canadians - even though his actions represent a more moderate approach. One of the reasons behind this may be the structure of the Conservative Party.

Though it has been revamped and rebranded multiple times, Canada’s Conservative Party is one of only two political parties since 1911 to have formed a government after a federal election, the other being the Liberals. Like in the United States, federal elections are generally reduced to pitched battles over an increasingly small number of constituencies. A majority of voters live in districts that very rarely change their patterns. As such, what it takes to win a

federal election in Canada is the party’s ability to win the swing votes in 60 ridings, roughly 20 percent of the electoral districts. In recent years, the Liberal Party has found more success in this - and since Trudeau won his first election in 2015, the CPC has elected three different leaders and anointed two interim ones, none of whom were able to gain the political footing to win an election. Oftentimes, rifts within the party are what cause the Liberal victory in federal elections, where they are capable of fielding a more united vision. The same cannot be said for their conservative counterparts.

In the aftermath of the convoy, Poilievre’s rise was rapid. His social media campaigns that were fiercely critical of Trudeau attracted many disenfranchised conservatives and young Canadians to his side. Poilievre began to get the attention of moderates who may have agreed, if only a little bit, with his opinions on the vaccine mandates and Canada’s lockdown measures.

Since winning the leadership of the CPC in September, party membership has soared, but Poilievre has not had much opportunity to show what sort of leader he will be. His first couple of weeks in office were overshadowed by the death of Queen Elizabeth II and a hurricane on the East Coast. More recently, he has been solidly on the defensive over revelations that many of his YouTube promotional videos were tagged with hidden keywords aimed at the algorithms that pander to the altright. That being said, his decisions when it comes to his personal staff show that he is intent on uniting the party. He has appointed many notable moderates to key roles, including Ian Todd, his new chief of staff. In the 1990s, Todd was a key member of Preston Manning’s Reform Party, a breakaway Western conservative party, but was known as a pragmatic proponent of non-divisive politics.

Poilievre is making it clear that he assumed the role to win elections, not just to destabilize Canadian politics.

To many Canadians, Poilievre’s rhetoric will certainly be worrisome, but his actions so far have been mostly benign. From the outside, it appears he is heeding advice that he now needs to appease moderates if he is going to successfully challenge Trudeau in the next election. As of now, the polls are fairly evenly split, with some giving him the edge and others forecasting a fourth-straight Liberal victory. But with an election a few years away, the polls are not yet indicative of any groundswells of support.

If the CPC hopes to win in 2025, it would need to present a united front between moderates and populists.

Poilievre’s actions acknowledge this, and though the convoy is still fresh in the memory of many Canadians and populism does seem on the rise, it does not yet look like Canada will have the same experience with populism as the United States or Europe. Poilievre’s first month in leadership suggests he has already realized that his party cannot rely on divisiveness and populism alone.

By Thomas Baxter Staff Writer ‘26

18

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA | VIRGINIAPOLITICS.ORG