Vassar Chronicle

Vol. XXI, Issue 3 February 15, 2012

The environmenT and The economy examined

naTional laura smiTh on obamas environmenTal inconsisTencies P 4
age

Two ShadeS of Green?

naTional Tess dernbach on obama adminisTraTions climaTe change Policies P 4

age

drillinG for Balance

Page 5

Timesunion.com

curioSiTieS Iron Lady lacks engagemenT wiTh ThaTchers Policies P 13

age

The vassar chronicle

tablE of ContEntS
National Affairs Foreign Affairs Curiosities Humour 3 7 9 15

Editor-in-ChiEf SEnior EditorS

Ethan Madore William Serio Alaric Chinn

ProduCtion & dESign CoPy & StylE natl. & forEign affairS From the archives: evidence of past Chronicle restructurings. humour CoPy & StylE aSSt. CurioSitiES aSSt. illuStrator

Tony Li Pavel Shchyhelski Abby Krolik Thomas Enering Jessica Tarantine Zack Struver Mandakh Bekhbat Eunice Roh Vincent Smith Shivani Dave Pavel Shchyhelski

Staff Editorial

The Proper Role of a Campus Publication

hen the Moderate Independent Conservative Alliance (MICA) revived the Vassar Chronicle in its modern form the goal was to provide a space for students to express views that fall outside of the mainstream of Vassars discourse. The intention was not to create a newspaper; it was to create a political journal. At the Chronicle we believe in being explicit about these intentions and contend that the project of self-definition ought be constantly reevaluated. To this end we would like to explain some of our recent content and format decisions and address what the role of a campus political journal ought to be. It would be wrong to call the Chronicle MICAs publication; we are sponsored by MICA, but much of our staff and most of our contributors are drawn from other organizations, political groups, and independent students. It is not a conservative publication, but rather one charged with actively soliciting moderate and right-of-center viewpoints because we feel that they are underrepresented in the campuss current climate. There are just as many articles that incorporate arguments more familiar to liberals, though truly any attempt to place individual perspectives along a political gradient risks both generalization and polarization. In the beginning we thought that content of a political journal ought to be narrowly limited to the political; now we are unsure. In fact, we do not think that the political can be narrowly

defined as a truly separate category. Initially we began to think that opinions on Vassar issues should be included in the general body of materials we publish, foras the modern adage goesall politics are local, and Vassars campus is our most immediate venue for political disputes and discussions. Politics, we thought, can also be too limited to a magpie-like occupation with individual events, policies, and scandals, to the detriment of discussions of extended, more timeless concepts of political theory and philosophy essential to good political discourse. Now we want to make a case for some level of inclusion of the arts and sciences in a political journal. Aesthetic considerations rarely constitute the extent of art in culture. Just as the creation of art is often a political act, politics intersect the discussion of art on almost every level. At its barest, artistic criticism can be radical politics conducted by other means. And so this issue of the Chronicle tentatively reincorporates art and culture into our understanding of politics, not to highlight the achievements of the producers of material culture but to explore their intents and the implications of their creations. Our inclusion of science-oriented articles is similarly exploratory and we feel moved to include it on two grounds. First, we suspect that the sciences cannot cleanly be divided off into a category of purely objective knowledge that is distinct from political influence; second, politicians (notoriously Republican poli-

ticians) too often attempt to separate politics from scientific influence. At first our motivation was to separate these new aspects of the paper into new sections: Debate & Discourse, Vassar & Local, an occasional Arts & Culture, etc. The problem was that there was significant overlap in content and that any division into categories can lead to an infinite division in the search for specificity. We decided instead to expand our National and Foreign coveragestill the principal matter of the Chronicle, and reorganize the other subjects into a new, unified section that reflects the multiplicity of approaches our writers employ. We considered calling the new section something like Arts & Sciences, but ultimately thought that for the most inclusive title we would have to reach to the historical. Curiosities is meant to reflect this attempt to reunify disparate categories of alternative political engagement in a way that, while not suggesting a unity in approach, reflects the tentative nature of our new categorization. We want to politically engage with the subjects of these articles; we are not sure if we have the definitive approach. It is a term coming from the Renaissance practice of grouping rare, unknown, and interesting objects into the private collections of curiosities that eventually gave rise to formalized museums. Inclusive, multifaceted, and hopefully interesting. The Staff Editorial is agreed upon by at least a 70 percent majority of the Editorial Board.

Letters Policy: The Vassar Chronicle encourages its readers to voice their opinions by writing Letters to the Editor, several of which will be selected for publication in each issue without regard to the authors race, religion, sex, gender, sexual identity, or ideology. Please address correspondence to VassarChronicle@gmail.com. Advertising Policy: All advertisements will be clearly demarcated as such. Contact MICA.vsa@ vassar.edu for rates. All material is subject to editors discretion, without regard for race, religion, or sex. Nota bene: The opinions published in The Vassar Chronicle do not necessarily represent those of the editors, except for the Staff Editorial, which is supported by at least 70 percent of the Editorial Board. M.I.C.A. is a student umbrella organization that aims to further moderate, independent, conservative, and libertarian thought on campus by sponsoring events designed to expand the breadth of Vassars political dialogue; to this end, M.I.C.A. produces The Vassar Chronicle. Contact MICA. vsa@vassar.edu to become involved with the club.

our ediTors sTand behind Their PublicaTion.

win 10
for each misTake found in

The Vassar ChronICLe

mica.vsa@vassar.edu

Page 2

ChronICLe, february 2012

Obama Administration Fumbles Education Reform

Tony Li Production and Design Editor

naTional affairs

hen opening a Social Studies textbook from a state in the Deep South, you may find that there is no mention of any American Civil War. Instead, you may find a section on the conflict known as the War of Northern Aggression. Keeping that discrepancy in mind, its not difficult to understand why theres so much talk these days about fixing our failing education system. If only we could compile a decent set standards for students and administrators towards which they should strive, maybe then we would finally be competent enough to win the economic future. In his recent State of the Union address, Obama lauded his Race To The Top initiative for having raised national standards at less than a percentage of the education budget. Raising standards and holding schools accountable to those standards through regular testing seems like a sensible idea, but, in reality, it does close to nothing to improve the quality of education that students receive while also failing to better prepare students for the future in any meaningful way. The problem is that we need to figure out a way of providing students with basic math, reading, and writing skills without constructing a labyrinth of standards that stifles teachers abilities to teach. Obamas Race to the Top Initiative places too much emphasis on measur-

ing teacher performance based on testing. In response to increased accountability, teachers and administrators end up spending valuable time and resources on increasing students test scores by teaching methods of identifying and answering specific types of questions that are expected to be on the assessment. They also teach them test-taking strategies that improve their scores without improving their understanding.

Students taking a standardized test.

Flickr

Schools should be providing students with an education that allows them to succeed in

whatever they choose to do after graduation. When teacher evaluation and pay is tied to students scores on assessments, teachers are incentivized to teach in a way that doesnt foster curiosity or desire to learn. The educational philosopher John Dewey rightfully asserted that the purpose of education is to prepare students for future responsibilities and success. When teachers are too focused on raising test scores by simply teaching to the test, they undermine the very principles and purposes of our educational system. The best way to successfully prepare students for the future is to give them an education that not only provides them with rudimentary knowledge of math, science, reading, and writing, but also encourages curiosity, creativity, cooperation, and, above all, instills a deep sense of civic responsibility. When teachers are forced to adhere to strict standards or follow lesson plans that are essentially one-size-fitsall, they lose the opportunity to present material in engaging and novel ways that can end up being far more effective than simple memorization and recitation methods. Studies have shown that when students engage and find deeper meaning in material, they are far more likely to remember what they learn. The emphasis on raising scores can divert resources from important extracurricular activities such as sports or fine arts programs that give students a chance to pursue their own interests. Extracurriculars can also keep students who wouldnt otherwise be motivated to

stay invested in school. After school programs can also serve as powerful socialization processes for students of different socioeconomic backgrounds, while team sports foster a sense of community and teach valuable teamwork skills. The benefits of these activities are immeasurable but very real. Teachers need to be allowed freedom in the classroom to do what they do best, but not without rigorous and universal certification processes at the federal level that ensure that we leave students in good hands in every school. When we know that we have highly qualified teachers who are prepared for the job, then we can manage without ineffective standards that only impede their ability to develop young minds. Of course, bad teachers arent the real problemthey never really have been. The problem is that many schools are simply underfunded and ill-equipped. Debates over the merits of standards and assessments downplay the fact that some schools are literally falling apart, even lacking the funds to repair broken windows or sewage problems. Race to the Top entices deteriorating schools across the country to compete for badly needed funds by wasting valuable resources on meeting standards that will actually lower the quality of education that students receive. Without a serious national discourse on the nature of inequality in schools, we may never escape the trap of high stakes testing that fails to provide students with any valuable skill sets besides taking standardized tests.

Obamas Rhetoric Inspires Nostalgia, Not Change

Thomas Enering National And Foreign Affairs Editor

ver the past decade, conservative and moderate Republicans alike have deified President Ronald Reagan, elevating him to a position of political greatness rivaled only by John F. Kennedys Camelot in the American popular imagination. In perhaps the greatest act of national mythmaking, Republicans transformed a man who spent billions of dollars bailing out financial institutions in the Savings & Loans Scandal into the quintessential defender of small government. Even more impressively, the anti-Soviet saber rattler of the early 1980s completely displaced the zealous advocate for international diplomacy of the later portion of the decade. After an endless series of Republican debates, it is now obvious that all of the remaining candidates proposals have congealed around one aspiration: returning the United States to the 1980s. I dont mean the 1980s of soaring deficits, a huge government surge fueled by defense spending, tax hikes, bank bailouts, and conferences with the Soviet Union seeking the elimination of nuclear weapons. I mean the 1980s that the Republicans have spent nearly two decades constructing: the decade defined by one mans tireless crusade to eliminate taxes, fight (internationalist!) bureaucrats, and staunch refusal to talk with the Commies. The fact that Newt Gingrich has mentioned Ronald Reagan well over 50 times (and within the first four seconds of the opening Florida debate) illustrates just how desperately this leading contender wants to cast himself as Reagans successor. The decision to constantly

invoke a powerful nostalgia for Reagans 1980s shouldnt surprise the electorate. Indeed, theres something almost intrinsically conservative about appealing to the past and aspiring to uphold a receding vision of American greatness. As the conservative icon, William F. Buckley, once famously quipped, a conservative is a fellow standing athwart history yelling, Stop! What we should find infinitely more distressing is President Obamas constant invocation of the immediate post-war era. After spending 2008 depicting himself as a transformational candidate, he is now shamelessly appealing to the same bad history and misguided nostalgia traditionally trafficked by Republicans. During his Kansas speech, he noted, a few years after World War II, a child who was born into poverty had a slightly better than 50-50 chance of becoming middle class as an adultAnd if the trend of rising inequality over the last few decades continues, its estimated that a child born today will only have a one-in-three chance of making it to the middle class33 per cent. Many portions of his State of the Union address reiterated this same glorification of the 1950s. Specifically, Obama declared, at the end of World War II, when another generation of heroes returned home from combat, they built the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever knownevery American had a chance to share the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement. Theres nothing inherently wrong with such invocations of freedom of opportunity and empowering all citizens with upward so-

cial mobility, but there is something quite sad about watching the president who once campaigned on assurances of change now promising us a fundamental regression to an earlier era. Perhaps the fact that media outlets continue to depict this distinctly nostalgic appeal as a form of populism most forcefully demonstrates how any rhetoric that diverges from a defense of predatory Wall Street raiding now constitutes a form of radicalism. In short, Obamas new rhetorical strategy places him dangerously close to emulating Republicans historical distortions for cheap political gain. This lurch to the right cannot blind Obama to the fact that the reasons we possessed a more vibrant middle-class fifty years ago are not solely attributable to a less dominant financial elite or a more pervasive desire to advance national projects. True, we did experience prodigious economic expansion in the 1950s and 1960s. Yet we also witnessed the emergence of the repressed Company Man; a Robert Moses-like power elite that effortlessly overrode the popular opinions of the workingman; and the continuation of Jim Crow policies that would have effectively precluded President Obama from participating in our public discourse. This consistent evocation of the past provides the president with two divergent paths. First, he can continue to imitate recent conservative posturing and utilize historical analogies to justify regressive policies. Alternatively, he can avoid playing on our potent collective memories for transient political gain and instead use our understanding of the past to defend the expansive liberalism that actually defined the pre-1968 era. He can declare that higher marginal tax rates for the wealthy are not antithetical to strong growth, but rather in-

extricably linked to our postwar prosperity. He can argue that the Greatest Generation perceived economic fairness as something deeply woven into our national fabric and not merely an import from socialist Europe. He can even accentuate (though Fox & Friends would undoubtedly decry this as populist) how that era emphasized greater investment in education, infrastructure, and, perhaps most critically, social safety nets.

Dwight D. Eisenhower, 34th President Of the United States.

Flickr

Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich will inevitably continue to battle over who represents their horrifically flawed remembrance of Ronald Reagan. Mr. Obama now possesses the opportunity to use a more factual representation of the past to do more than simply justify the status quo.

ChronICLe, february 2012

Page 3

Obama Rejects Keystone XL and Praises Hydrofracking President Promotes Inconsistent Policy
Laura Smith Contributor

naTional affairs

t was an inconsistent week for President Barack Obama and the environment: first with his rejection of the Keystone XL Pipeline, and then his subsequent glorification of hydraulic fracturing during the State of the Union address. When it comes to the pipeline, as one of 12,000 Americans who encircled the White House on Nov. 6, 2011 in protest of the proposal, I was relieved by his decision to reject it. The fight against the wouldbe 1,700-mile monstrosity isnt over yet, but this is a big step forward in the right direction. Its common these days to hear the pipeline discussion framed along the lines of environment vs. jobs. At the very least, this concedes the severe environmental impacts that would result as products of the pipeline. However, its not as if this pipeline were our only opportunity for job creation; the unemployment rate dropped to 8.3 percent this past January, the lowest its been since February 2009. Both the Transport Workers Union (TWU) and Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) oppose the project, and theyve got the right idea. We shouldnt irreversibly exploit the environment for some temporary, low-paying jobs that will increase our reliance on filthy tar sands oil. Besides, TransCanadas estimates for

job creation are likely significantly inflated. Their 2008 Presidential Permit application specified a peak workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel to aid in construction of the Keystone XL. The 20,000 person-years of employment tossed around in job creation conversation is based on nontransparent input and forecasting from TransCanada. During construction of the Keystone I, also built by TransCanada, only 11 percent of construction jobs went to South Dakotan locals, and they were essentially all temporary and low-paying. Even with all of the gray area in legitimate job creation, along with the certainty in environmental degradation, theres no guarantee that the pipeline would even function properly. The Keystone I was estimated to have one spill in seven years. Instead, there were 12 spills in one year. If the Keystone XL pipeline ruptured after being built by our hands, it would be devastating for the heartland of America, threatening drinking water for millions and sabotaging agricultural land. This would be a disaster launched upon ourselves that we can easily prevent by not spending seven billion dollars to build it in the first place. As an export pipeline, the Keystone XL would bring Canadian oil to American refineries for shipment to foreign European and Latin American markets. Contrary to popular belief, some families in the Midwest would have to

pay an estimated 20 cents more per gallon of gasoline as a result of the pipeline, since Gulf refineries geared towards export would be receiving oil that small Midwestern refineries currently receive. There has also been mention of the pipeline reducing our reliance on Middle Eastern oil. Considering that the Keystone XL would be an export pipeline, that isnt the case. The only real way we are going to decrease our imports from the Middle East is through embracing renewable sources of energy. Instead of constructing the Keystone XL, how about putting money towards funding energy research instead? I do not mean hydrofracking. Just days after rejecting the pipeline plan, while giving the State of the Union address, Obama praised natural gas drilling (hydrofracking) as our safe, green energy future, claiming that it will generate 600,000 jobs and provide us with energy for 100 years. Wait, Obama, do you mean the very process that our own Environmental Protection Agency confirmed this past December as having contaminated public drinking water with toxic chemicals? The same natural gas drilling on which doctors, scientists, and public health researchers called for a moratorium this past January at the Physicians Scientists and Engineers for Healthy Energy national conference in D.C.? You said this about hydrofrack-

ing the day after the Energy Information Agency cut its estimates for shale reserves across the U.S. by 42 percent? We are going to be forced to turn to renewable energy at some point. Instead of investing millions to build a hydraulic fracturing infrastructure that will not last for long, will contaminate our drinking water, will make our land ugly, and will pollute our air as badly as coal, the money should be put towards developing real, clean green energy technology. Its noteworthy that Obama never actually used the term hydrofracking anywhere in his speech. Hydrofracking has turned into quite the negative buzzword, and many who are distanced from the issue may not understand that its the same process as natural gas drilling. To hear the term natural gas drilling and not understand its implications would make it sound nice, safe, and, perhaps most importantly, natural. I dont think Obama means everything he said. I think he praised hydrofracking to the extent that he did because he is trying to get reelected. He knows that he probably angered a lot of his liberal base by praising natural gas drilling but not to the extent that he will lose their votes because of it. For some, however, he is cutting it pretty close. The facts about hydrofracking and the Keystone XL are already in, but the federal money keeps coming in anyway.

Obama Must Address Climate Change Seriously

Tess Dernbach Contributor

n Jan. 12, 2012 President Barack Obama delivered the annual State of the Union address. Many newspapers have criticized that speech for being scattered and for lacking an overall theme or direction. I do not share that criticism: Obama analyzed the state of our union, point by point, addressing the economy, foreign policy, education, energy, and the cynicism many Americans feel towards their Congress. Through all of this, the president did have a uniting theme. He described the defining issue of our time as how to keep alive the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirementNo challenge is more urgent, he insisted. While I do believe that all people, not just Americans, should be able to have a good, fulfilling life for themselves and their children, there are clearly more urgent challenges. One in particular comes to mind, and when taking that challenge into account, most of Obamas plans seem like whistling in the dark,

especially after the remark, the differences in this chamber may be too deep right now to pass a comprehensive plan to fight climate change. This is probably true. Many Republican congressmen continue to embarrass themselves by denying global climate change, even as I type this article on a 57 degree Fahrenheit day in February. These congressmens rejection of basic science does not change the fact that we are in serious trouble. James Hansen, the director of NASAs Goddard Institute, along with many others, has said that an increase of just two degrees celsius above pre-industrial levels of the global temperature is enough to completely melt the Arctic, leading to a significant rise in sea level. If greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at the current rate, the global temperature will increase by at least three degrees celsius by 2100, which would be even more disastrous. Regardless of whether Congress is able to deal with this issue in a mature, responsible, and fact-based way, it is the duty of the U.S. to deal with this impending calamity immediately. After all, the U.S. is the second highest overall emitter of greenhouse gases, surpassed only by China, whose population is four times our size.

President Obama has failed to address climate change issues.

Flickr

The promise of the American Dream simply does not fit into this situation. A commonly cited statistic tells us that, although Americans make up only five per cent of the worlds population, we consume 24 per cent of the worlds energy. We consume too much food, energy, water, and various commodities of all sorts. Much of this is wasted anyway, including 200,000 tons of edible food daily. I believe in the American dream of having a job you enjoy, supporting your family, and living happily,

but the American dream in which many people believeand that Obama, Congress, and almost all economists advocateis not possible. There are simply not enough resources on this planet for every U.S. citizen to have a big house, a big car, and enough products to fill that house to the brim, especially if the well being of every other person on the planet is taken into account. How can we address these problems in a political realm in which economic growth trumps all other priorities and short-term success is more important than catastrophe in the long-term? Obama has always wanted to encourage bipartisanship and compromise, and so it fits into his patterns that he will not try to solve a problem that half of Congress doesnt believe exists. The time to indulge these childish congressmen passed long ago, and the fate of the planet is at stake. Executive power often trumps congressional power to start warsand this battle is more legitimate and life-threatening than most of the wars we have fought in the past fifty years. Obama owes it to the country, and, moreover, to the entire planet, to act immediately. Every second he fails to do so, the earth spins onward, swiftly approaching devastation.

Page 4

ChronICLe, february 2012

Drilling for Balance on Keystone, Hydraulic Fracturing Environmental Protection and Energy Production
Will Serio Senior Editor

naTional affairs

limate change, induced by both humans and natural fluctuations in temperature, is a threat to every living creature on Earth. It is generally accepted within the scientific community that carbon emissions necessarily increase global temperatures because they trap heat within the atmosphere. Furthermore, a shift of just a few degrees represents the difference between life and death for many living organisms, as well as a significant challenge to our current way of life. Consequently, this issue must be addressed on a local, state, national, and international level in order to maintain an inhabitable environment. The main barrier to progress is the deep ideological divide represented by the fringe of the Republicans and Democrats. On the right, one need only look at the demonization of Jon Huntsman after his outlandish statement on climate change: Listen, when you make comments that fly in the face of what 98 out of 100 climate scientists have said, when you call into question the science of evolution, all Im saying is that, in order for the Republican Party to win, we cant run from science. He was subsequently attacked, his popularity amongst conservatives fell, and he had to temper his tone back on this issue in order to stay viable within the Republican primary. Sadly, that didnt work. The ideology of the left is just as divisive, though. There is a strong push to end the use and development of all fossil fuels as quickly as possible, despite the detrimental economic consequences and lowered environmental costs of cleaner fossil fuels like natural gas. Put simply, the far-right strictly values energy production over environmental production, while the far-left strictly values environmental protection over energy production. Despite this pervasive divide, climate change must be addressed through energy policy: an inherently political process. Scientific, economic, and personal beliefs enter this political discourse, thus complicating the process even further. What is clear, however, is that energy has increased our standard of living dramatically. From the vehicles we drive to the electronics we use every day, we are completely dependent on the extraction, production, and transportation of energy. Both sides agree we need a better energy policy, though the means to that goal are very different. My opinion is that our energy policy should reflect a balance be-

tween the energy production and environmental protection. This necessarily deals with the limits of current technologies as well as the harm of burning fossil fuels. Moreover, we must acknowledge and tackle very real political challenges that come with this issue, as well as the red herrings that distract us from the true issue: creating a sustainable energy policy that reduces our national security contradictions, promotes a clean environment, takes into account costs and benefits of different policies, and remains cognizant of the dangerous pitfalls in economic and political arguments based on fiction rather than facts. To accomplish this task, I will address two hot topics that deal with energy production and the environment: the Keystone XL Pipeline and Hydraulic

essary to approve the project and protect the American people. The environmental issue surrounding the Ogallala Aquifer is misleading since there are billion of barrels of oil flowing across it. However, to pander to this key demographic of Obamas base, the administration will push to reroute the pipeline away from the Ogallala Aquifer and then approve it. Obama, true to form as a center or center-left president, is trying to achieve a balance between environmental protection, practical economic benefits, and his own political popularity. On the economic side, there are a few significant arguments in favor of going forward with this project. Firstly and most importantly, the tar sands in Canada will probably be developed regardless of

The Energy Information Administration claims that natural gas has lower carbon emissions than other fossil fuels. fracturing. The Keystone XL Pipeline has been propagated by environmentalists, capitalists, and the media as a make-or-break project that is vital to Americas energy and environmental policy. This appears to be a popular red herring in our current energy discourse, distracting us from engaging in a discussion of broader energy policy. Nevertheless, a decision must be reached and should be made based on a cost-benefit analysis, not a political calculation. Unfortunately, President Barack Obamas rejection of the pipeline project was mostly a political statement. His press release proclaims that he rejected the proposal because the rushed and arbitrary deadline insisted on by Congressional Republicans prevented a full assessment of the pipelines impact, especially the health and safety of the American people, as well as our environment. This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information nec-

Energy Information Administration

Americas ultimate decision on the Keystone XL pipeline. Canada is currently courting China to develop the exact same land, since the decision is being held up in the United States. As such, the actual environmental damage from carbon emissions can be regarded as a sunk cost. For all those who do not study economics, a sunk cost is one in which the harms occur regardless of the decision being made, meaning that they should be disregarded. Therefore, environmentalists, if they truly want to protect the environment, must band together and lobby Canada to prevent their companies from extracting energy from the tar sands of Alberta. I hope the Vassar Greens have passports. Secondly, this project has great marginal benefits. The increase in trade, exports, and jobs will help the economies of both the U.S. and China. Within the context of global economic weakness, I believe that the government should not, and, to the chagrin of the environmentalists, will not oppose this project. Fusing these points, a logical conclusion of opposing this proj-

ect solely in America while doing nothing to prevent it from occurring at all is that we will suffer the marginal costs of higher carbon emissions without the marginal benefits of a growing economy and increased tax revenue. Concerning the politics of hydraulic fracturing, the ideological divide is just as clear. The far right wants the natural gas industry to move forward without government restraint. Theyd also like to see the EPA dismantled. On the other side, we see a movement against hydraulic fracturing in any cases, even if safely regulated to the best of the EPAs ability, despite it being a cleaner alternative to coal and oil. What is forgotten is that we mine for coal and drill for oil every single day, so we suffer from the consequences from the extraction and use of those energies all the time. To be fair, there is recent evidence from Cornell University that claims that methane leaks may cancel out the positive benefits of lower carbon emissions. Nevertheless, there is a huge body of research being conducting on this issue, so hopefully we can gain more conclusive evidence on this issue in the near future. The economics of this issue are clear as well. One need only know how supply, demand, and prices work in a market setting. Modern power plants can burn coal or natural gas to produce electricity. Natural gas can also be used in vehicles equipped to use it. In fact, T. Boones Pickens, an exoil magnate, has been pushing for natural gas exploration and production for years now and recently garnered sponsorship from the trucking industry. Additionally, there is an abundance of natural gas in shale rock formations, so the supply of this market can shift out dramatically if we allow for natural gas drilling (in a safe, regulated manner of course). The only market problem is the price is so low that companies are not finding it profitable to drill new wells. Therefore, a demand shift via increased use in vehicles and as electricity would allow companies and people to profit from a low price, domestic form of energy. It would also reduce our imports of foreign oil, a long-held rhetorical flourish from the past few decades presidents. Natural gas, though it is a fossil fuel, represents a cleaner form of energy than the status quo and we ought to use it as a transition until green technology advances to become more competitive in cost and efficiency. For now, oddly enough, the coal lobby and the environmental lobby are on the same side against hydraulic fracturing. Politics truly makes strange bedfellows.

do you like whaT youre reading? wanT To join The sTaff of The Vassar ChronICLe?

columnisTs, naTional & foreign affairs, curiosiTies, and coPy ediTors needed.
vassarchronicle@gmail.com

ChronICLe, february 2012

Page 5

naTional affairs
Regional Divides Produce Severely Telling CPAC 2012
David Keith Contributor

alking the hallways of the Marriott Woodley Parkthe host of the 2012 CPACthe most commonly uttered phrase by conference attendees was brokered convention. Every four years pundits like to ponder the prospect of a brokered convention, and they are always wrong. This year however, something tells me that the possibility is greater than ever. In the late fall of 2007, when Hillary Clintons poll numbers were tumbling and Barack Obamas and John Edwards were on the rise, these same pundits saw the potential for a brokered convention. The scenario was that Edwards would do very well with southern democrats, Clinton would sweep Super Tuesday states, and Obama would do well in the caucuses, in which his organization would win him delegates. This, according to pundits across the political spectrum, would lead to a fractured Democratic Party, only to be united by the force of a brokered convention that would lead to the nomination of former Vice President Al Gore. It sounded nice, but everyone who understood anything about modern day politics knew it was lunacy. The bitter 2008 primary between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama may have been intense, but it was not driven by a regional, or cultural chasm. Four years later, we have a bitter primary cycle, and it is indeed driven by regional, ideological, and socio-economic divides. CPAC couldnt have been more telling. All I had to do was look at the throngs of Romney, Santourum, and Gingrich volunteers to understand the significant differences among the bases of these four men. Rick Santourums support was built among those who would best be described as Joe the Plumber conservatives: blue collar, often hailing from the Midwest. To identify a Gingrich supporter, all one had to do was look for someone sporting a southern accent, blue blazer, beige kakis, and a bow tie.

And finally, those there supporting Mitt looked as though they just stepped out of Goldman Sachs office building, taking a quick break to check the latest market updates on their smart phone. While comical at times, these regional differences have played out in the nominating contests thus far, and have the potential to make this a long, unique primary season. While John McCain was not an easy sell to social conservatives in 2008, he still won the nomination in quintessential Republican form: winning two out of the first three contests (Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina). This year however, each of the three candidates showed their strengths in the early January primaries and caucuses, and dont seem to be slowing down. There is a plausible scenario that Romney continues to win along the coasts, boasting his electability credentials, Santourum wins throughout the rust belt and western states, while Gingrich makes a name for himself with support throughout the south. Romney may be deemed the front-runner, but he has showed very few signs of playing this role well. No matter how many pundits and elected officials deem him the best candidate to defeat Barack Obama, he cant garner the national polling support of over 30 percent of Republican voters. Moreover, his CPAC speechone that was intended to seal the deal with those who have thus far deemed him a moderateleft many party activists asking the same questions as they did before the start of the conference. Mitt Romney may be polished, well funded, and intelligent, but he absolutely doesnt connect with party activists. He is too differenthis religion, his profession, and his policiesto win the support of current Santourum and Gingrich backers. He may win the nomination, but he is sure to be a much weaker candidate come the general election. This leads me to side with Sarah Palin on the prospect of a brokered convention. While this scenario has never occurred during the television era, and the backroom deals will be

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), former GOP candidate, gets interviewed at CPAC 2012. To her left is MSNBC contributor and award-winning journalist Howard Feinman. perceived as corrupt and un-democratic, the eventual nominee will have a better chance at uniting the party than a beaten up, tired Mitt Romney. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama may have bruised each other with their highly divisive, personal swipes, but their supporters all shared a similar hatred for George W. Bush, and could unite behind their eventual nominee to an extent that a Gingrich or Santourum supporter will not be able to for Romney. The Republican Party currently faces a cul-

Will Serio

ture war of their own. There are deep socioeconomic, cultural divides that dont seem to be fading any time soon. If this blood bath continues, and no oneother than potentially Ron Pauldrops out of the race before the middle of spring, the best bet for beating President Obama may in fact be nominating someone who can uphold the classic three pillars of the modern Republican Party, and unite conservatives enough to keep the focus on a November victory.

Inflation Worries Overstated, Concerns Ignore Reserves Ratio

Vicky Que Contributor

hen I was little and first found out about Five and Ten stores, where everything costs only a nickel or a dime, I wished that I had been born a century earlier. I would occasionally get a dollar for some odd chore, and if only there were still Five and Ten stores, I could have splurged. Little did I know, even if I had been born a hundred years earlier, the value of money would have been lower. The concept of inflation was lost on me as a child, but, as I grew older, inflation was the specter splashed across the news and denounced as the bane of society. To the average person, inflation represents a rise in prices and consequentially a decrease in the amount they can purchase. What they dont realize is that there is also a rise in the price of labor, meaning their wages rise to compensate for the decrease in purchasing power. In light of the recent financial crisis,

which began with the bursting of the housing bubble, the economy faced the worst depression since the 1930s. Overall, consumer spending decreased, and general economic activity stalled. In an attempt to stimulate the economy, the Federal Reserve increased the money supply. When more money is injected into the economy, the interest rate decreases to attract customers. The lower interest rate also discourages people from saving as much because the returns have decreased, and so it encourages consumption. However, as money supply increases, a larger proportion of the population sees the absolute quantity of their money increase, but the value of each individual bill diminishes. The cost of a loaf of bread could be two dollars, but with the increase in money supply more people are able to purchase this item. Since the quantity of bread in the market has not changed, the only way to offset this new demand for bread is for the price to increase. In short, one of the causes of inflation is an increase in the money supply. Many commentators feared the Federal Reserves

policy would result in inflation. Yet some people realized that, despite the relationship between money supply and inflation, there are more factors involved and that the media was overemphasizing the fear of inflation. The money supply can be defined as a function of the money base and a money multiplier. The money base is the absolute amount of money printed, but people use the money to make transactions, and the cycle continues. The money multiplier depends on two factors: the amount of currency people hold in relation to the amount they put in the bank as interest earning deposits (currency-deposit ratio) and the amount of deposits that banks will hold in reserves (reserve-deposit ratio). The currency deposit reflects the individuals desire to hold cash now or put money in the bank. Holding cash now allows one to make transactions, but putting money in the bank earns interest. The reserve deposit ratio indicates the banks willingness to lend money. When someone makes a deposit to a bank, the bank holds a fraction as reserves and uses

the rest to loan out. The exact amount of reserves is a fraction of the deposit and is set by the Federal Reserve. Suppose a bank receives a deposit of $100 and loans out all of it. If the customer comes to make a withdrawal, the bank has no money and therefore isnt doing its job properly. Therefore, at all times, banks keep a fraction of the deposits on hand. During the financial crisis the increase in money supply did lead to a decrease in interest rates, but most of the money went into bank reserves. Banks began holding more deposits at reserves rather than lending them out, so the factor reserve-deposit ratio increased. Part of the sub-prime mortgage crisis was due to the high rate of defaults, then banks became more wary of loaning out money. Although the Federal Reserve increased the money supply, most of it is just sitting in banks and actually circulating through the economy. The money multiplier is rather small despite the large money base; the money supply will not grow as much as people believe. Inflation is not a serious threat to the future.

Page 6

ChronICLe, february 2012

U.S. Asylum Process Ignores Horrors of Gender-Violence

Shivani Dave Curiosities Assistant Editor

foreign affairs

fter fifteen years of secret and convoluted litigation, a new precedent was set in 2009 by the outcome of an immigration case that granted asylum to a Mexican woman on the grounds of domestic violence. This was the first domestic violence case allowed in the United States asylum process. The woman first applied for asylum in 2005, after being repeatedly raped at the point of guns and machetes, but she was told her case had to meet specific requirements. It was only after she was able to present evidence that the Mexican government and police could not and would not help her because of its social and cultural tolerance of such appalling behavior. According to the woman, one judge agreed to help herif she would have sex with him first. The Department of Homeland Security will continue to view domestic violence as a possible basis for asylum, but they will heavily scrutinize the specific threat the applicant faces. Officially, individuals are eligible to apply for asylum if they have suffered persecution or fear that they will suffer persecution due to race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, and/or political opinion. If the application is approved, asylum refugees are granted citizenship and allowed to remain in the country. The decision made under the Obama administration is a reversal of the previous Bush administrations stance. Prior to the 2009 court ruling, many battered women had been turned away on account of domestic violence not fitting into the formal definition of asylum. In June of 1999, a Guatemalan woman who had fled horrific, repeated domestic abuse was denied asylum because she could not provide evidence that her husband had abused her because of her political opinion, membership in a particular social group, race, religion, or nationality. The fear was that allowing battered women to apply for asylum would lead to a surge of new applications. However, such a surge would be unlikely because of the strict guidelines that are enforced by the system. According to a court filing by the administration, to gain asylum as a battered woman, the abused victim is required to show a judge that women are considered subordinate by her abuser and that domestic abuse is widely tolerated in her country. Canada, for example, has begun accepting genderbased persecution as grounds for asylum, and,

after two years, these cases still make up less than two per cent of its 40,000 refugee claims. Domestic violence is a sub-sect of the larger gender-based violence that plagues many women. Gender violence refers to gender related persecutionmeaning that one is persecuted specifically for being male or female. For example, persecution in the form of rape and sexual violence, that is motivated by political, religious, or other associations is considered gender-specific, while gender-based persecution refers to rape and sexual violence that is motivated by ones gender. The guidelines that govern grounds for asylum on the basis of gender violence are not sufficient. Although the war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is over, women still fear for their lives daily. Sexual slavery, kidnapping, forced recruitment, forced prostitution, genital mutilation, and mass and systemized rape are rampant. Even at the start of the violence, immigration courts were aware of the on-going gender violence. As quoted by an immigration judge in March 1988 at the U.S. State Departments Democratic Republic of the Congo Profile of Asylum Claims & Country Conditions: Domestic violence, including rape and beatings, is widespread but rarely reported. The problem is handled within the extended family, and only in the most extreme instances is the matter brought to the police. There are no provisions under the law for spousal battery. There are no crisis centers or hotlines. The problem of violence against women is largely ignored by the population and the media. If this knowledge was present, why then were hundreds of women turned down in the asylum pleas? In 1998, one woman whose husband dislocated her jaw, knocked her unconscious, raped her repeatedly, beat her in front of her children, and threatened to kill her, applied for asylum. Unable to go to the police because, in the Congo, a married woman is considered legally incompetent, she fled to the United States. Though immigration judges extended their sympathy, she was denied asylum three times because her circumstances did not meet the required guidelines to grant asylum. She was detained by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) for two years and four months for illegally remaining in the U.S., and, after much struggle, was finally granted Convention Against Torture (CAT) relief. In 2002, the Board of Immigration Appeal finally granted her asylum. According to the Vulnerable Womens Project, almost half a million women were raped during the Rwandan genocide. More than 90

per cent of women and girls over the age of three suffered sexual violence in parts of Liberia, and only three out of four women have survived sexual violence in the Congo. Most women hoping for asylum on the basis of gender violence come from countries where sexual violence by security forces has been institutionalized. In Bosnia ethnic cleansing took the form of the systematic rape of up to 50,000 women and became recognized as a war crime. In addition, the rape and sexual violence in Rwanda was ruled to be an act of genocide by an international criminal tribunal. Finally, in 2008, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution that recognized sexual violence as an issue of international peace and security. Yet still, gender violence has not been added to the categories for asylum eligibility. In 2002, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) issued guidelines on gender related persecution that urged asylum grantors to enlist a gender sensitive interpretation of the five categories. Gender alone, however, is still insufficient to qualify as a ground for fear of persecution and must be paired with one of the other five categories. Systematic rape, honor killings, female geni-

tal mutilation, and domestic violence are apparently not enough to qualify as persecution by themselves. Immigration courts fear that the use of the broad membership category of gender violence would open the floodgates of asylum applicants; this theory has shown to be unsubstantiated. The step forward made by the U.S. in granting asylum to the Mexican woman who was a victim of domestic violence does not extend to escape from female genital mutilation and other forms of gender violence. For a woman to apply and be granted asylum on the ground of domestic violence, she is faced with a multitude of obstacles. Proving her persecution is often times persecution in itself; the lack of gender sensitivity in the asylum procedure further restricts and delays access to protection. With a shortage of female interviewers and interpreters, instances of wrongful detaining, asylum grantors doubting the credibility of gender issues and medical evidence, and an ignorance of the perils women face, the struggle to freedom is agonizing. It is high time that the U.S. and UNHCR consider ratifying asylum guidelines to include gender violence as a category.

The horrors of gender violence need to be taken into account in the United States asylum policy.

Flickr

do you wanT To make your voice heard? The Vassar ChronICLe encourages you To submiT columns and leTTers To The ediTor.
conTacT vassarchronicle@gmail.com sPeech is civilizaTion iTself. - Thomas mann
ChronICLe, february 2012 Page 7

America Must Promote Greater Rights for Afghan Women

Aleya Romero Contributor

foreign affairs

t was just this past December that Gulnaz, the Afghan woman who was raped by her cousin and accused of adultery, was released ten years early from prison. It was only public pressure that forced Afghanistans president to release Gulnaz and her daughter, who was conceived through the rape. However, a release from prison does not guarantee Gulnazs freedom. In a country rooted in Islamic traditionalism, she is pressured to marry her attacker. Otherwise, Gulnaz will have to find work in order for her and her daughter to survive. Gulnaz is not the only Afghan woman who has experienced injustice. Most women in Afghanistan experience violence every day, and very few report it. As seen in Gulnazs case, women who prosecute the men who rape them are often imprisoned and harshly criticized by their communities. Rape is not the only horror Afghan women face. They are often sold by their families and not allowed to marry the spouse of their choice. Because most Afghan women are not educated, they cannot find a job or a way to survive on their own.

They are trapped. When the United States invaded Afghanistan in 2001, the Bush administration campaigned for Afghan womens rights by addressing their need for an education and civil rights. However, the campaign quickly slipped away, and there was hardly any active engagement in securing womens rights. While Afghan women have started holding elected offices, working outside the home, and running organizations, they still face extreme opposition. Today, it is more important than ever to help women in Afghanistan. Once United States troops withdraw from Afghanistan, there is concern that the Taliban will return and wipe away any improvements there have been in Afghan womens rights. Currently, Afghan women have voiced that they would like to be involved in the Taliban Peace Process. They hope that, with their involvement, they can ensure their rights are included and enforced. The United States needs to become more actively involved in protecting Afghan womens rights. According to Melanne Verveer of the Secretarys Office of Global Womens Issues, ad-

dressing violence against women is the responsibility and imperative of every nation. In terms of its moral, humanitarian, development, economics, and international security consequences, violence against women and girls is one of the major impediments to progress around the globe. On Feb. 4, 2010, Senators John Kerry (D-MA), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Susan Collins (R-ME), and Representatives William Delahunt (D-MA) and Ted Poe (R-TX) introduced the International Violence Against Women Act, which would combat international violence against women and girls. Once it was referred to the Committee, the bill seems to have been abandoned. The United States needs to start helping the women of Afghanistan immediately. There must be more collaboration with other countries, so, together, the Afghanistan government is pressured to protect women. Lately, European and South Korean newspapers have been calling Afghan women issues to the international communitys attention. If Europe, South Korea, and the United States can all fight for womens rights, then there is a better chance that they will make a difference. Working with nonprofit organizations,

such as Women For Afghan Women and Amnesty International, is also a key factor in helping to make a difference in Afghan womens lives. Currently, they assist women with getting jobs and creating safe havens. When a five year old girl was raped, it was Women for Afghan Women that paid for her reconstructive surgery and offered her shelter. All governments should be actively supporting organizations that are creating better lives for women in Afghanistan. While working with nonprofits and governments may help Afghan women in the immediate future, a longterm solution is also needed. Not only should the women of Afghanistan be allowed to participate in the peace talks with the Taliban, but they should also have more positions in power. There is little chance that someone will listen to them if they have little or no authority. Governments do not have to be the only ones fighting for womens rights in Afghanistan. They need constant support from global citizens in order to guarantee freedom and fundamental liberties. Society loses something for every Afghan woman who is trapped and cannot contribute her skills, talents, and intelligence to the world.

Can China Solve the Burgeoning Euro Debt Problem? America Loses Role As Primary Lender
Nikolas Goldberg Contributor

he impact of European and American intervention has been stamped upon China, leaving an indelible mark on the construction of the current Chinese state. However, since the opening of real trading channels with the Peoples Republic in the late 1970s under President Jimmy Carter, the relationship between the two parties has changed dramatically. For many years, China has embarked on a program that has religiously purchased large quantities of United States debt, in the form of Treasury Bills and Treasury Bonds (hence both shortterm and long-term debt obligations). However, recently many commentators have posited that China should begin to do the same in Europe to impede the growing debt problem. The question for the Chinese can be illustrated as moral: will they defenestrate almost two hundred years of history, ignoring the treatment of the falling Qing dynasty and the fledgling Kuomintang Republic that lasted only a fortnight. Can and will China (as it often has) ignore history in the interest of leveraging a significant portion of the worlds current financial crisis? China, as the most stable nation aside from the United States (which has significant economic problems at the moment), is the worlds strongest and fastest growing economy (although strictly speaking, this is almost problematic to say, since

China has problems correctly reporting economic figures, and has yet to correctly value its currency, the yuan). This action is one where the U.S. concedes one of its primary roles as the worlds leading loan shark to its only rival, the Peoples Republic. Although the United States has not held this role in many years, it has an extremely proud history of rescuing much of the world from financial ruin. For similar reasons, it goes without saying that this transition is only slightly problematic to both the European Union and the United States. Firstly, this shows that the European experiment with a federalized union and a common currency has major internal problems that cannot be corrected without help from an old colonial domain. This in and of itself is problematic, which shall without doubt bruise a few egos. To reiterate an earlier point, China would replace the United States as the begrudging savior of Europe. The United States does not have the illusions of grandeur to the extent of Europe. Still, this action would severely curtail its ability to maintain oversight of Chinas accountability. If China is to be the global creditor, the United States loses all moral prerogative to hold China in check, thus severely compromising many aspects of our foreign and economic policies. Furthermore, the United States still holds a large stake in the future of the European Union and its currency for a myriad of reasons, beginning with national and economic security. Lastly, it will necessitate

the revaluation of the U.S.Chinese relationship, and entirely confuse the ChineseEurope relationship. Will the Peoples Republic rescue the birthplace of democracy? What price in dignity and Chinese accountability will the European Union pay to maintain their failing union? Furthermore, although its vital that the European Union and the Euro does not collapse, allowing China to gain further leverage over the global economy will reek havoc amongst the current world economic order. That being said, the final solution will inevitably involve China, but it must not be to the sole actor in saving Europes finances. Although any solution will have drastic consequences to the current state of the European Union and the Euro itself, the United States must carefully consider how best to minimize international instability. After all, it certainly has an interest in maintaining the status quo. The impact of European and U.S. intervention has left an indelible mark on the formation of the current Chinese state. However, since the opening of real trading channels with the Peoples Republic of China in the late 1970s under Jimmy Carter, the relationship between China and the U.S. has changed dramatically. For many years now, China has been religiously purchasing large quantities of U.S. debt in the form of treasury bills and treasury bonds, which comprise both short-term and long-term debt obligations. Some commentators have posited

that China should begin to do the same in Europe to impede the growing debt crisis. As the worlds strongest and fastest growing economy, and the worlds most financially stable nation aside from the United States, China has usurped the U.S. in its role as the worlds leading loan shark. For many reasons, this transition is problematic for both the European Union and the United States. For one, it shows that Europes experimentation with a common currency has major internal problems that cannot be corrected without outside assistance. If the Chinese step in, the United States will lose all moral prerogative to hold them in check, thus severely compromising U.S. foreign and economic policy. Furthermore, for reasons of national and economic security, the United States has a personal stake in the future of the European Union and its currency, and any footing China gains in influencing the euro is footing lost for the U.S. It is vital that the European Union and the euro do not collapse, but allowing China to gain further leverage over the global economy in the process will disturb the current world economic order. That being said, the final solution to the European debt crisis will inevitably involve China, and any solution will require drastic changes to the European Union and the euro. In this respect, the U.S. must carefully consider how best to minimize the impact of these changes, as its best interests are in maintaining the status quo.

Page 8

ChronICLe, february 2012

Religious Institutions Values, Womens Rights Ought Balance

Jessica Tarantine National and Foreign Editor

curiosiTies

n the United States, government and religion have long had a quarrelsome relationship, their sordid history telling tales of the government trampling first amendment rights and religious institutions denying opportunities incongruent with their values. The most recent clash of church and state hits close to home: religious postsecondary institutions are denying birth control to their students. This is not a new practice, but recently the legality of such a practice has come under scrutiny. The recently passed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, more colloquially referred to as Obama care has mandated all thirdpayers to provide contraceptives as part of insurance packages co-payment free. Religious institutions are technically complying with this law: their insurance packages cover birth control, and they simply refuse to let their doctors prescribe them, a course of action which is coming under fire as more and more findings of President Barack Obamas independent panels show that contraception is medically necessary to a womans well being. While certainly women at said institutions are claiming that the spirit of the law is being violated, religious institutions are outraged at being forced to do something so conflicted with their most fundamental beliefs and becomes a clear clash of freedom of religion and. Well, actually its not clear what right is actually being violated in the case of the women whose doctors are refusing the contraceptives. Certainly, birth control is important to be able to selfdetermine and certainly arguments against contraceptives are based in religious and traditionalist roots. But is there a right to contraceptives and moreover are the institutions meaningfully violating this right? Even if we answer these questions in the affirmation, is this right to access birth control more important than the right to religious freedom on the part of the institutions? I think answering all these questions in the affirmative is a hard thing to do. Nowhere is there an overt right in the Constitution or elsewhere to contraception. The best we can do to generate such a right would be to look to the Ninth Amendment or the rulings of Roe v. Wade. So suppose we grant the right to contraception, what are the implications? First, a point of clarification: the actual right would be to access contraception, not the right to contraception, as the right to contraception would seem to imply that the government should be supplying it free of charge, which seems problematic. So, we will be assuming the right to access birth control. So we know that the government cant restrict this right, but what about private institutions or organizations? Private organizations restrict rights all

the time. Catholic hospitals dont have to provide abortions and can deny patients the right to access an abortion; publications can refuse to publish articles that are not in line with their beliefs. Rights can and are restricted all the time by private organizations. This makes sense when you consider that you have to voluntarily associate with these entities. You may not have all the various rights given to you by the government in a very specific instance if you belong to an organization but you agreed to be a part of that entity knowing full well the ramifications. The same can be said of the students who choose to attend Catholic universities. Students enroll knowing that universities will have rules and restrictions that reinforce their values, and this limits certain rights. You may not be able to have a guest of the opposite gender in your room after a certain hour, restricting your freedom, but you accept it as part of the realities of going to that university. I would think that students who go to these institutions know ahead of time that these restrictions exist. Colleges often have restrictions that arent even religious. Take West Point, where students live with a host of rules and regulations. Arguably, under the Ninth Amendment we have the right to stay out as late as you want. But West Point takes that right away, a restriction that you agree to when you enroll there. The choice to go to that college was voluntary. In effect, your enrollment in that school gives them permission to take away a right.

Birth control is necessary for womens health.

Wikipedia Commons

Religious liberty is a necessary facet of the United States.

Flickr

But suppose, you still think that the right to birth control has to be guaranteed for some reason or another, and a private institution cant take it away even with your permission, what then? Then I think you have to look at what it means to take away a right and if these universities actually take away a right. While these universities restrict ac-

cess, I dont think they completely remove access. Students can go elsewhere to get prescriptions: Planned Parenthood, free clinics, or private doctors. These students do have insurance, which will allow them to go to other health care providers, and by law the prescription provided by these doctors can be filled co-payment free. Moreover, students can use other forms of contraception that do not require prescriptions. So at best these institutions are restricting their right to access, not completely denying them their right. But on the other hand, mandating that doctors at religious universities prescribe birth control, seems to be violating their right to exercise their religion, and moreover it seems to be violating a private entitys right to religious freedom. For every student who wants to have contraceptives prescribed by a doctor at Fordham University, there might be a religious student who finds that a school he or she selected because of the schools dedication to shared religious values is violating the promise the school made to its students. That student would find it outrageous that the school was violating that very value which drew that student to the school. So I think that religious institutions can prevent their own doctors from prescribing birth control to their students. But while I think it should be legal for them to do so, its mutually exclusive with their purpose as a school that educates students in science. Its anachronistic for a university to deny its students access to contraceptives. Universities, which pride themselves on research capabilities and study in the hard science, should honor the advances made in science and medicine. If medicine tells us contraceptives are vital to a womens well being, then universities that say they rigorously pursue truth in medicine and other sciences should practice what they preach.

It is impossible to be in the academic community in a meaningful way when you ignore its preaching. I would say colleges that deny access to contraceptives to be privileging religion over science, and it begins to show flaws that science and religion can coexist within the same entity and at the point at which science and religion can no longer coexist in those universities, then the college administration shows that their colleges fail to be valuable research entities become instead privilege religious socialization. I think access to contraception is essential to self-determination for women, but it is not the place for governments to restrict freedom of religion to promote mainstream values. We protect freedom of religion because we recognize that its values will often differ from the majority. Religious institutions need to realize that they are a tool of the people and need to reflect the needs and wants of the people. From my understanding, Catholicism once preached that failure to comply with strict religious doctrines would lead to eternal damnation, now it preaches reconciliation and forgiveness. If the Catholic Church preached what it did before the Reformation it probably wouldnt have much success. Religion is reflective of the times, granted a more conservative reflection of the times, but still a reflection of the times. So while the Catholic Church preaches that contraception is immoral, it needs to recognize that 98 percent of sexually active Catholic women use contraception (the same proportion of non-Catholic women). This shows disconnect between the Catholic religious leadership and its members, which should be addressed internally. Its a problem within the religion itself, which should be considered. But the disconnect is not justification for restrictions on the religious freedoms.

ChronICLe, february 2012

Page 9

curiosiTies
Papers in 2011 that You Probably Didnt Hear About
Brian Lu Contributor

oing to a liberal arts college, the topic of conversation drifts from the new interpretations of Dantes Inferno, to the Powerhouse Theaters latest production, and to Hawthornes portrayal of women in his works. However, discussions revolving around the work of science are seldom heard. Although I understand that science does have a language of its own, I find it saddening that the accomplishments of the many scientists and doctors that are essential to life are simply taken for granted while the artistically stimulatingbut luxurious at best works on display at the Lehman Loeb Art Center and the James W. Palmer Gallery are highly praised and visited. Looking through the Miscellany News, one can find a dedicated section on the Arts, but the science-related articles are scattered throughout the Features and the Multimedia sections. If a science-related article does get published in the Misc, it is often about the people behind the science, not on the scientific findings themselves. Looking through the events calendar, there are always new shows, concerts, and talks by wellknown artists, but rarely does a scientist get invited to talk at Vassar. The fact is, scientific discoveries are made every day. Some improve upon previous knowledge, some provide the foundation for future development, while others have the potential to change science itself. Below are a few stories in 2011 that I found interesting but went by relatively unnoticed at Vassar. Predictable Evolution? Anyone who has taken BIOL106 at Vassar should remember Caenorhabditis elegans, the small worms that grow on agar mediums. When not giving Intro to Biology students the creeps, C. elegans serve as excellent model organisms for biological research. In an August 17, 2011 Science article by Elizabeth Pennisi, Is Evolution Predictable, using C. elegans, researchers discovered evidence suggesting that evolution may take a predictable path. A paper published in Nature reports that different strains of the worms responded in the same way to the same evolutionary pressureit was previously believed that evolution depended on too many chances to be repeatable. The life of C. elegans can take two developmental paths: either it matures in three days, reproduces, and dies in two weeks, or it turns into dauer larva, staying in suspended animation that allows them to survive for months without food before turning into adults. The latter path is usually chosen when the environment is unfavorable. For example, when the environment is too crowded, C. elegans detect high concentrations of pheromones released by their peers, and take the dauer route. Researchers noticed that lab strains of C. elegans no longer responded to

pheromones signaling crowded conditions. In the wild, crowded conditions usually lead to less food, so evolutionarily it made sense for the worms to go into suspended animation and wait until there was more food. In the lab, however, there is always more food, so the ones that are most fit, the ones that reproduce the most, are the ones that ignore the pheromone. Researchers have identified the mutation that disabled two genes for the pheromone receptor, genes that regulate how quickly C. elegans mature and reproduce. Fifty to 100 genes affect whether a worm enters the dauer state, but other strains of C. elegans, and even other lab nematodes identified by the researchers that bypass the dauer stage, all lack the same genes. These findings suggest that evolution tends to delete genes whose loss will not have significant effects on the organism. If true, this may allow researchers to predict the path of evolution given the environmental stressors.

it does infect, more than half will die. The experiments were conducted using ferrets, which are generally good models for predicting the flus virulence in humans. The studies aimed to find the genetic basis for contagiosity, which would provide early warnings for naturally occurring viruses developing pandemic potential. Officials are concerned that terrorists could access the papers, once published, and recreate the virus to spark epidemics. The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity recommends publishing the conclusions of the studies but not the details and data that would enable someone to repeat the experiment. The scientific community is, in general, adamantly opposed to any form of censorship, but both publishing journals, Science and Nature, are taking the advisory boards recommendations seriously. Both journals may withhold information when the papers are finally published but only if a system is created to provide the unpublished information to legitimate scientists who need

Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus (OPERA), a particle detector, claim to have detected neutrinos fired from a particle accelerator in CERN, the European particle physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, traveling faster than the speed of light. The OPERA researchers fired about 16,000 neutrinos over a period of three years and found that the particles traveled the distance from CERN to OPERA roughly 60 nanoseconds faster than light would have. The spokesperson for the experiment says the uncertainty in the measurement is ten nanoseconds. If the findings are true, it will shatter the theory of special relativity, on which a large part of our current understanding of the universe is based. For now, more independent research is needed to confirm the results. Cancer Immunotherapy The idea of using the immune system to treat cancer is not new. In fact, one of the functions of the immune system is to remove abnormal cells from the body, but cancer cells simply found a way to circumvent that mechanism. Now, according to an August 10, 2011 Science article by Sarah Williams, Serial Killer Immune Cells Put Cancer in Remission, researchers have found a way to modify a cancer patients immune cells to specifically target the patients cancer cells (Williams, 2011). Clinical trials for this new treatment look promising. All three patients are now in remission after the treatment. The treatment works by reprogramming the patients immune cells. The researchers designed a new gene that can be inserted into the patients T cells, a class of immune cells responsible for killing abnormal, dangerous cells and foreign pathogens, to coax them into attacking cancerous B cells, the cause of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The gene codes for a receptor that binds to a molecule unique to cancerous B cells and sets off a chain reaction that ends in T cells destroying the cancerous cell. Samples of each patients T cells were taken and inserted with the new gene. After the T cells had the tumor-specific receptors, they were infused back into the respective patients blood. Each modified T cell killed an average of over 1000 tumor cells, and an average of over one kilogram of tumor cells were killed in each patient. While the study only has data for one year, the T cells will likely remain effective for longer. Theoretically, the gene can be modified to be specific to other types of cancer cells as well, making this treatment applicable for a wide range of tumors. More studies are needed to evaluate the longterm effects of this treatment and to confirm the results of the study. Brian Lu 13 is a Biochemistry major and has conducted extensive research at Vassar College in the Chemistry Department as a Research Assistant and through the Undergraduate Research Summer Institute.

Above: A(H5N1) strain of the Avian flu virus. Recent scientific findings have made this strain the subject of a debate regarding censorship in the scientific community.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Scientific Censorship Reported in a Dec. 20, 2011 New York Times article by Denise Grady and William Broad, Seeing Terror Risk, U.S. Asks Journals to Cut Fly Study Facts, in the first time in history, the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, which is overseen by the National Institutes of Health, is asking scientific journals to keep certain details out of the reports the journals intend to publish. The reports pertain to experiments in which researchers in the United States and the Netherlands created a highly transmissible form of A(H5N1), which causes bird flu. Bird flu, as the name implies, mainly infects birds and rarely infects people, but of the unfortunate people

it. At the time of writing, the papers are still unpublished. Faster Than Light? Albert Einstein first proposed the theory of special relativity in 1905. The theory, in addition to predicting the famous equation E=mc2, sets the universes speed limit at the speed of light. Physicists have long held that to be true, backed up by myriad experiments testing the theory. As reported in a Sep. 22, 2011 Science article by Adrian Cho, Neutrinos Travel Faster Than Light, According to One Experiment, it is not surprising, then, that results claiming to have broken the speed of light were met with skepticism. Researchers in Europe using Oscillation

Page 10

ChronICLe, february 2012

The

Case
Chenxi Cai Contributor

Against

curiosiTies

Benevolent
and pulsating blood vessels. Only after you overcome the initial anxiety will you be able to think about the situation objectively. What motivates the speech? What is unfamiliar in the speech that make you uncomfortable and why? What does it tell you about other people? What does it tell you about yourself? What actions should I take in response to the speech? This process takes time, and only through a prolonged process of questioning and interrogating will knowledge and empowerment emerge from an initially unpleasant experience. The benefits for the general public are also immense. Speech is in many ways a public good. Ideas spread around and are readily available for use by anyone who chance upon it, and the private benefits of a speech to its originator often is surpassed by its social benefits if the gains by all users of the idea is aggregated. Much more commonly, however, it has become customary for some people to automatically label all statements contrary to their beliefs as offensive. They have become so hardwired in their thinking that they deny any opportunity to challenge their existing beliefs and learn from others simply by disposing of all information that superficially goes against a perceived political correctness stance. Do physiological differences between the sexes contradict the tabula rasa presupposed by modern gender studies? Does genetics lead to different life expectances among people from various racial groups? Is the gay wage gap caused by discrimination or self-selection? These are valuable empirical questions that helps us learn about the world, and they have definite answers, for that matter, if you try hard enough. However, the knee-jerk response of refusing even to put them on the table often preempt productive discussion and further fuel ignorance and ill-consequences. The three Is used by Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo to describe paternalistic policy making that plagues economic development equally applies here: ignorance, ideology and inertia. Two concepts in decision theory explains the tendency to avoid taking offense at all costs really well. One is that of loss aversion. In real-life decision making, people are much more sensitive to losses compared to gains. Experimental evidence has firmly established the idea that people will forfeit much large gains in favor of avoiding small losses, often at a ratio above two to one. So even if being offended, or sustaining mental discomfort due to temporary emotional distress incurred by new information incongruent with existing experience, to be exact, is a small loss compared to learning from such interactions, which yields much bigger gains, people will choose to avoid the small loss and forfeit the larger gains. Or alternatively, under circumstances where

Censorship
only a small fraction of people suffer a moderate loss while the rest stand a large gain, the small minority will fight hard to defend their territory while the people stand to gain largely look on: small losses are much more painful than large gains are pleasant. The second concept is that of time inconsistency. People value immediate gains over future gains disproportionately. The gains from avoiding discomfort with being offended is immediate, while gains from learning usually occur over a long period of time. People would happily opt to go with the cognitive ease of avoiding small current losses over larger future gains of learning from the thinking and behavior of other people. Indeed, these tendencies are so strong that they operate to prevent the majority of parents in rural India to immunize their children, even with full knowledge of its enormous benefits, until policy interventions step in: the rewards, though large, are too far off in the future, and the costs, though small, are immediate. Here is why we should stop the patronizing practice of politicizing matters of speech and take a more pragmatic stance: the net long-term losses are large. If organizations and individuals constantly content themselves with avoiding small losses at the cost of bigger gains, they will end up forgoing so much gains that they become impoverished, both in a financial and metaphorical sense. The scarier part is that you would never know that so much cumulative damage is done: the losses take the form of forgone opportunities, and people are notoriously bad at taking opportunity costs into account. I hope this proposition serves to expand the discussion of offensive speech beyond its charted waters, and move things in a more fruitful direction. The points made here is clear, that we need more reason and evidence, and less paternalistic thinking and uninhibited emotional outrage, and that most incidences of benevolent censorships on the Vassar campus as it stands, are counterproductive and impediments to beneficial self-engagement. Chenxi Cai 11 is a Vassar alumnus and is currently pursuing a Ph.D in Economics at Brown University.

ne thing I will always remember about my Vassar College experience is the enormous amount of time people devoted to talking about political correctness, offensive language, and the number of instances of official and unofficial censorships. Both happen pretty much everywhere: in classrooms, in the dining hall, during parties and during club activities. Two prominent examples from my time at Vassar were a mini-course on effectively courting Japanese ladies taught by a student censored due to alleged sexist content and a class project on sex workers in the Caribbean proposed by a female classmate openly rejected by the professor in front of everyone, due to alleged inappropriateness. I am staggered by this level of censorship; even more by the charged emotional response and the implicit legitimacy assumed on the part of the supporters of censorship. On the other hand, I have no desire of invoking the time honored tradition of free speech, that sacred cow enshrined in the American constitution and routinely abused by lawyers in courtrooms. An act of speech is indistinguishable from any other category of actions and inactions. To quote Stanley Fish, Congress shall make no law regulating acts of speech is equivalent to Congress shall make no law. Instead of the rigidity of granting unlimited immunity to all or some forms of speech, we should evaluate each instance of speech on its own merit through cost-benefit analysis of promoting the public good and the general well-being. If an instance of speech is proven to have more harm than benefits, on good evidence, and the cost of administering censorship is justified by the excess harm, then censorship is warranted.

ternalistic regimes would like to envision a particular set of values they would like to impose upon the minority who do not share the values as much or who do not express them in the same way, and it is not clear that who gets a say in dictating these common values and what rules should be applied in distinguishing acts that conform to that values against those that dont. As for mutual understanding, how much understanding can be gained from silencing one party is quite beyond me. As for personal security, wouldnt it be more convincing if they present evidence on what instance of violation of personal security is directly or indirectly related to the particular instance of speech in question?

Much more commonly, however, it has become customary for some people to automatically label all statements contrary to their beliefs as offensive.
Moreover, the discussion almost focus exclusively on the negative consequences of offensive speech. Indeed, if one already judge an instance of speech as offensive, he or she would probably not be able to see any benefits in it. And the reverse is true for those who judge an instance of speech as beneficial. This is known as a halo effect in cognitive psychology and is well supported by experimental evidence. People tend to see only one side of things if they depend primarily on their intuitive feelings instead of objective reasoning. Let us be honest, every coin has two sides, and every instance of speech has benefits and costs. (And most, if not all economists have two hands, I suppose). Since the cost of those speeches is well-discussed and hard evidence still wanting in most cases except for the self-reported emotional distress, let me instead focus on the benefits of such speech, both for the allegedly distressed and for the general public. The benefits are enormous. You learn about other peoples thinking, preferences and motivation, and perhaps more importantly, your own thinking, preferences and motivation, and how to analyze, negotiate and resolve these differences. The process takes time because you need to suppress your anxious immediate reactions to the situation, which is understandable by the way because speech truly offensive to you almost always involve unfamiliar stimulus that activate your evolutionary instinct either to fight or to escape, including faster heartbeat, shallow breathing, rising body temperature

If an instance of speech is proven to have more harm than benefits, on good evidence, and the cost of administering censorship is justified by the excess harm, then censorship is warranted.
However, this is not the general pattern of discussion in most if not all forms of censorships I have had the opportunity to observe. Usually the reasons cited for imposition of censorship is extremely flimsy, couched in rhetorics of community values, mutual understanding, and personal security. As for community values, most pa-

are you enjoying The new CurIosITIes secTion? send a

leTTer To The ediTor

vassarchronicle@ gmail.com
Page 11

or feedback To

ChronICLe, february 2012

curiosiTies
Student Director Creates Vassar Web Series
aftEr hourS with niColE glantz 15
Zack Struver Humour Editor

This issue, instead of attending Office Hours with a Vassar Professor, the Vassar Chronicle interviewed a student in the Class of 2015. This temporary change reflects our committent to a broader discourse in the Vassar community as well as our support of students artistic endeavors.

assar College students have embraced media, in forms both old and new, as their major means of individual and group expression; student organizations are devoted to producing newspapers and magazines (literary, photography, fashion, erotic), while others maintain an extensive web presence. We have a student radio station, a wide variety of student run music groups, and, complementary to the Vassar drama department, an abundance of student theater groups. What we lack, however, is a community dedicated to creating and promoting motion picture. Sure, the Vassar Filmmakers meet weekly, but few attend their meetings, and fewer of their ranks produce any works that are made available to the wider Vassar community; senior film majors within the context of the film department monopolize the production of film on campus.

...our goal is to acquaint the audience with a range of students that defines the social landscape of Vassar.
Nicole Glantz, of the Class of 2015, is trying to fill the void in student film, left by the last big student film project, 4th Floor Main, which fell to the wayside after two seasons, with her creative new web series, We Are Young. Currently in production, the series follows the lives of four archetypical Vassar students as they attempt to navigate through the complex interpersonal interactions at Vassar so that they can find their place in the social order. This ambitious young filmmaker hopes to leave a lasting imprint on the Vassar community through her dedication to student film; she hopes to incorporate students from all four classes in the production of this series, and her ultimate goal is to create a system that will maintain her own web seriesand promote the production of otherslong after she graduates from Vassar. The Vassar Chronicle recently conducted an exclusive interview with Ms. Glantz, in which she told us about her interest in film and her hopes

for the series. Vassar Chronicle: How long have you been interested in film? Nicole Glantz: I began to develop an interest in filmmaking when I was about 12 years old. I enrolled in film programs and classes during my summer vacations, and in high school I began to work on commercials, shorts, and eventually a feature. My main focus is writing and directing, however I enjoy every aspect of production. VC: What are your inspirations for the series? Glantz: I draw inspiration from those whom I encounter. Vassar students are incredibly unique, with diverse passions and personalities. The people that I have interacted with or observed since I arrived here are the inspiration for the series We Are Young. They are the characters. VC: Whats your series about? Can you tell us a little about the plot and characters? Glantz: We Are Young is about four Vassar freshmen attempting to navigate college life. They struggle with finding their identities and determining which group they fit into on campus. Alex (Joe Capotorto 15), Gaby (Norma Barksdale 15), Jesse (Zach Leatherman 15) and Mona (Maria Rose 15) are our principles. Alex is portrayed as your typical athlete, interested in basketball, parties, and girls. He masks his intellectual capabilities from his teammates. Gaby is intellectual, driven, and extremely involved in the Vassar community. She devotes most of her time to her studies and her campaign for sophomore class president. However, she secretly desires to explore the party scene. Jesse is nave and compassionate, unsure of who he is and where he belongs. Through his involvement in a cappella, he has begun to develop confidence to accept his identity. Mona is witty and sarcastic, known for her eclectic taste and style. On first impression, many classify her as the quintessential Vassar hipster. Gaby and Mona, who are roommates, live on the same hall as Alex and Jesse, also roommates. Initially all four freshmen are not close friends; yet we will watch them form an unlikely friendship as the show progresses. Although the main characters are played by freshmen, based on the hope that the series will continue for all four years, we would like to incorporate students from other grades as guest stars. The intent is to involve the entire Vassar community. VC: In what way do you think your series will benefit the Vassar community? Glantz: I created the show with the hope that it would entertain Vassar students. I also hope that the series encourages viewers to see beyond stereotypes and first impressions

Nicole Glantz intently sets up a shot for her new web series, We Are Young.

Darvin Morales

VC: Beyond the Vassar community, this series is going to be publicly accessible. What do you want people to learn about Vassar from your series? Glantz: The target audience for the show is Vassar students. However, given that the show is a web series and therefore publicly accessible, our goal is to acquaint the audience with a range of students that defines the social landscape of Vassar. VC: Have you run into any difficulties filming on campus? Glantz: Every production experiences its difficulties. Our primary struggle with the project has been attempting to accommodate everyones busy schedules. However, we have managed to find the time, as everyone is extremely dedicated to the project and confident in its outcome. We have an amazing cast and crew, and I am

very excited to continue working with all of them. VC: How supportive do you feel the current infrastructure of student film organizations are of your series? Glantz: The filmmakers club is very supportive of the production. As a member of the club, I have had the opportunity to meet other students who share my filmmaking interest. Many students in the club are involved in the We Are Young production. VC: Have they offered to support you with equipment or in other production aspects of the show? Do you think they can improve in this aspect? Glantz: We are not using film equipment provided by Vassar, as a few crew members on the show own high quality cameras and sound equipment. However, it would be very much appreciated if Vassar could give us funding for other production equipment, especially if the series continues once we all graduate. Hopefully, this will be achieved by becoming an organization. VC: You say you would like the series to continue all four years. If the opportunity arises, do you intend to hand the series off after you graduate? Glantz: Yes, I would love to hand the series off after I graduate. We are in the process of trying to become a club or organization. Anyone who wants a job on set is welcome. My goal is that every year we recruit new members, who will eventually continue the series once I am gone. They could choose to focus on the next freshman class, or maybe go a different direction with a new show concept. This series is a chance for students who are interested in production, notably TV production, to learn from other students and from hands-on experience about the process of creating a show. We are all learning as we go along, finding out what works, and what does not, and consequently growing as filmmakers.

The cast and crew of We Are Young. From left to right: Ben Kaufman 15, Joe Capotorto 15, Nathan Bazan 15, Rachel Dorn 15, Sam Plotkin 15, and Nick Chianese 14.

Zack Struver

We are young will Premiere in The near fuTure. conTacT nicole glanTz 15 aT niglanTz@vassar.edu if you would like To ParTiciPaTe in ProducTion.
Page 12 ChronICLe, february 2012

Margaret Thatcher Absent In The Iron Lady

Ethan Madore Senior Editor

curiosiTies

eviews of Phyllida Lloyds The Iron Lady (2012) have come to a common conclusion. Critics laud Vassar Colleges own Meryl Streep 71 for her unsurprisingly astonishing portrayal of Margret Thatcher, though lament that the Abi Morgans script did not know what to do with her. It is a performance in want of a film, they echo. They are not altogether wrong, though there are redeeming moments of character drama that begin to coalesce into an adequate story. Thatchers relationship with her husband, Dennis Thatcher, played by Jim Broadbent, is engaging from the moment we are introduced to him as the quirky ghost that haunts Thatchers aged imagination. We see flashback sequences detailing his initial proposal, his openness to her role as an ambitious young woman who scorned home life, and his ultimate frustration when her zealous commitment to public life distanced her from her small family. Even after his death, a tension between her life as Britains indomitable conservative prime minister and their relationship continues to weigh heavily on Thatchers subconscious, and her difficulty in letting him goto even remember that he has passed and is not standing there, at her shoulder, fiddling with a well-worn tie or reminiscing over old home videos, remains a constant challenge for Streeps Thatcher. This is a compelling relationship between two brilliant actors, though the fact that this is the central drama in the film reveals the true

problem. The Irony Lady, albeit awash in strong moments and the nascent form of a good story, does not know what to think of Margret Thatcherthat ferric giant that dominated Britains political arena in the eighties and whose legacy is still in constant dispute. Would the story of the rise and fall of a prominent male world leader have been framed predominantly by his return to domestic life? Possibly, though even from its opening scenes, The Iron Lady presents Margret Thatcher the Prime Minister as a figure of a distant past, divorced from current relevance and struggling to understand her position in the modern world. The film opens with a sequence in which Thatcher escapes from confinement in her manse (made necessary due to her deteriorated mental state) and goes to the corner store to buy milk for her long-dead husband. No one recognizes her, no one is even polite or patient with her as she struggles to comprehend the price of a carton of milk and count out change on the countertop. It is clear that Streeps Thatcher is conservative, though it is surface level, glib detail drawn in monochrome across the films narrative. The source of her conservatism seems only to be her independentmindedness and an early love for small business gained at her fathers grocery shop; it manifests itself primarily though speeches in which Streeps Thatcher berates those who fail to act, to do, to be independent. Thus Thatchers political ideology is completely conflated with her personal ideology and driveboth are rendered together bereft of any depth

Meryl Streep plays Margaret Thatcher in The Iron Lady of explanation. It is impossible for the viewer to agree or disagree with Thatchers actions as Prime Minister as they are framed solely as personal decisions that are indisputably consistent with her persona as the Iron Lady. The actual effects of Thatchers actions on domestic Britain are told chiefly through montages of speeches, celebrations, and riots. It is perhaps that those involved in The Iron Lady did not want to engage with Thatcher the Prime Minister because they could not reconcile her potentially condemnable actionsthe full extent of the Falklands campaign, her crackdown on trade unions, domestic austerity, and shaky human rights recordwith the impressive character drama they hoped to tell.

Thelma Adams

Ultimately the film is unfair to Britains first female Prime Minister in that it does not weigh her heart on the grounds of her engagement with national and foreign affairs, does not allow her to possess a political ideology that goes beyond her own story of opposition, ambition, and personal sacrifice. Conservatism in the film is flat, cartoonish, and inconsistent; it is essentially irrelevant. Thatcher was a controversial figure, some of her actions truly warrant strict scrutiny, and yet this is precisely what The Iron Lady refuses to give us. We meet Thatcher the Daughter, Thatcher the Wife, Thatcher the Widow and only learn of her politics as they interact with those personas. Where is Margret Thatcher?

Office of Health Eduction: Definitively More Than Condoms

Travis Hungreder Contributor

he Vassar College Office of Health Education has been the visiting site for the hot and passionate endeavors of Vassar students for quite some time. Although the office staff takes pride in the fact that students feel comfortable grabbing items that promote safer sex lives, they would like the campus to know that they are way more than a never-ending condom dispensary. The Office of Health Education staff is determined to make your four years at Vassar the healthiest they can possibly be. The woman in charge of this task is Director of Health Education Renee Pabst. Her approach focuses on health viewed in all aspects of an individuals life including physical, spiritual, and mental. Under her tutelage are the Wellness Peer Educators (WPEs), all of whom are required to attend multiple trainings on topics ranging from stress reduction to eating disorders. Their job is to then take the information from these trainings and pass it on in creative, engaging, and entertaining ways that are accessible to all students. Most of the campus has undoubtedly come across some form of the WPEs work. You may have seen a flier in a bathroom stall from time to time with infor-

mation on drinking behavior and alcohol contents, or you may have taken notice of the Meatless Mondays tabling as you raced to enjoy the culinary concoctions at ACDC. Im sure a lot of the campus may find these ways of promoting healthful lives a little odd, but they are certainly effective. For instance, how many readers know the answer to how much alcohol is in a standard shot? You can thank the office for that knowledge. The office does not limit itself to these quirky ways to educatethey also promote health through major programs surrounding AIDS, relationship abuse, body image, distressing techniques, etc. Currently, they are dedicating their time to Sexpo. Sexpo is an annual event that promotes everyones favorite topic: healthy sex lives. The event is taking place Wednesday, Feb. 15, 2012, from 11:00 A.M. to 2:30 P.M. in the College Center. At the event, there will be several off and on campus organizations tabling with 90s pop music, free food, andthe coup de gracethe Masturbation Information Station. At all the tables there will be information on healthy relationships, Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs), and several other topics regarding sex. This year the office has invested in flavored lubes for the campus to taste test ranging from cola to mint. After the main event in the Col-

lege Center, another event will take place in the evening at 8:00 P.M. in the Main House MPR called Ask The Sexpert. At this event, all questions submitted into the question boxes or anonymously emailed to the office will be answered by a range of experts. If you need any information on how to submit a question feel free to email or drop by the office.

Office of Health Education

The Office of Health Education is responsible for promoting healthy lifestyles at Vassar. Although a large part of the WPEs job does focus on educating large masses of students, they are also around for personal assistance as well. Every house on campus has a wellness peer educator assigned to itif you are unsure of whom it is ask a house team member. Feel free

to ask your WPE about any health related topic, they are there to provide information and help you make the right decisions. The WPEs are also always there when a student needs to vent, may be looking for advice, referral, or needs assistance with any other personal matter. Any student who goes to a WPE for any matter can rest assured that anything discussed is kept private. This way of educating the students has proven to be effective. The programming focuses on matters that are important to a wide variety of students. This diversity allows the Office to reach out to all different types of students who have a vast array of concerns, answer their questions, and remain judgment free. Personally, I have worked in the Office for three years now and it always surprises me just how large the attendance is at our events. I find it even more impressive that the attendance seems to get larger every year. Luckily the greater the attendance the campus provides, the more programming we can add or adjust to meet the ever changing needs of the students. Our office is always open to new ideas, friendly faces, and improving the health of the Vassar community. If there is any way we can improve upon ourselves of meeting the Vassar communitys need we will be more than glad to do so.

ChronICLe, february 2012

Page 13

Revisiting Sir Arthur Conan Doyles Literary Legacy

Alaric Chinn Editor-in-Chief

curiosiTies

ost Vassar students, at some point in their lives, have been exposed to Sir Arthur Conan Doyles iconic Sherlock Holmes and Doctor John Watson. Through the original stories (e.g. The Hound of the Baskervilles, A Study in Scarlet), various television series throughout the 20th century, the Guy Ritchie movies starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law, and the recent BBC series starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, Sherlock Holmes has become a timeless figure whose first name alone evokes deductive genius. Yet, surprisingly, fewer people are acquainted with the mind behind the great detectiveSir Arthur Conan Doyle. Born in Edinburgh, Scotland on May 22, 1859, Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle was interested in medicine, modeling the resident of 221B Baker Street after his real-life professor, Joseph Bell, who is considered to be a pioneer in forensic science. Yet, ironically, one of the greatest mysteries about Conan Doyle is completely unrelated to Sherlock Holmes, that is, the mystery of his knighthood. If you are like me, then you may have assumed that the Sir in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was granted to him for his contributions to crime fiction. Yet, such an assumption would be incorrect. In reality, Conan Doyles knighthood was conferred upon him for a work that has fallen into

obscurityThe War in South Africa: Its Causes and Conduct (1902). The War in South Africa: Its Causes and Conduct was written during the Second Boer War (1899-1902) at a time when Great Britain was enduring international and public criticism for its conduct. The Second Boer War was fought between the British Empire and two independent republicsthe South African Republic (Transvaal Republic) and Orange Free State. The Afrikaans-speaking descendants of Dutch colonists formed these latter countries in the mid-1800s. With the discovery of gold in the South African Republic in 1886 and the subsequent influx of English-speaking prospectors, tensions mounted between the resident Boers and British Empire (which had actually fought another war roughly six years prior). By 1899, following a failed British raid in 1895, anti-Boer sentiment in England, and a military pact between the South African Republic and Orange Free State and their subsequent militarization, war broke out in October 1899. Within the first five months, the Boer republics scored early victories against scattered British garrisons, but their victories were essentially negated when British forces relieved those garrisons and captured the major population centers of the Boer republics, granting them nominal control over the two territories. At this point, the remaining Boer units resorted to guerilla tactics in an attempt to disrupt the occupying British forces. Frustrated, the British resorted to one of the darker pages of British historyits exten-

sive use of the concentration camp. It is to this last chapter that Conan Doyles involvement can be attributed. Following international condemnation of British conduct, in an attempt to soften the criticism, Conan Doyle drafted and published The War in South Africa: Its Causes and Conduct as well as a much longer work, The Great Boer War (1900). In the former, Conan Doyle argues that the formation of the Boer republics is resultant of the abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire. Alluding to the compensation of former Boer slaveholders, he writes, We spent our money, we ruined our West Indian colonies, and we started a disaffection in South Africa, the end of which we have not seen. The same sentence is utilized in The Great Boer War with the addition of Yet if it were to be done again we should doubtless do it. Although he continues that the implementation of the compensation was inefficient, thereby leading to compensation below the market price for slaves in South Africa, he nonetheless establishes the moral high ground of the British Empire in the war. He goes on into a discussion of the causes of the war, in which he argues that freeborn men (prospectors following the news of gold) were accustomed to living under liberal institutionsdenied to them by the Boer republics, which grew rich through the taxes and other regulations placed on the immigrants. Regarding concentration camps, Conan Doyle describes the reason for its formation, When considerable districts of the country were cleared of food in order to

hamper the movements of the commandos, and when large numbers of farmhouses were destroyed under the circumstances already mentioned, it became evident that it was the duty of the British, as a civilised people, to form camps of refuge for the women and children, where, out of reach, as we hoped, of all harm, they could await the return of peace. He acknowledges an epidemic of measles that overtook many of the civilians in the camps (although he qualifies this by arguing that rates of measles are similar to those in other South African towns), he writes, Be this as it may, we cannot deny that the cause of the outbreak of measles was the collection of the women and children by us into the camps. But why were they collected into camps? Because they could not be left on the veldt. And why could they not be left on the veldt? Because we had destroyed the means of subsistence. And why had we destroyed the means of subsistence? To limit the operations of the mobile bands of guerillas. Unfortunately, he did not continue this train of thought by asking Why did we limit the mobile bands of guerillas? This is probably because such a line of questioning would ultimately lead back to Why were we at war with the Boer republics? Regardless, King Edward VII conferred a knighthood to Conan Doyle for his services to the crown on Oct. 24, 1902. It seems that this knighthood is a reflection of British nationalism rather than as a reward for an objective analysis of the war. In any case, I hope that this solves the mystery as to the Sir in his name.

Chess

Team

David Gonzalez Contributor

ast weekend, three members of the Vassar College community, Noah Kulick 15, Jayneth Mayur 15, and David Gonzalez 14 took a road trip to Princeton University. Their purpose was to compete in an intercollegiate team-chess tournament. Of the eleven schools present, Duke University, Columbia University, and, of course, Princeton University stood like towering giants, apt to crush all competition. How did the Vassar team stack up? First of all, the tournament was for teams of four, forcing the Vassar squad to pick up a novice player at the tournament site. Several members of the Princeton and Columbia teams had achieved the title of expert, out-ranking the top Vassar player by a significant margin. Moreover, the Vassar team was forced to take a bye, that is a draw, in the first round because they had arrived late due to traffic. To compound all these problems, Vassar does not have an official chess club. These were three individuals that took initiative upon themselves to find the tournament, register, and pool resources in order to travel down to New Jersey. The team had met randomly at different times in places around campus, and practiced at the VassarChadwick Club, a community Chess Club that has been meeting in Rockefeller Hall every Monday around 7:00 P.M. for several years. These three students had to prove they could compete with the Ivy Leagues.

Kulick, the top Vassar player, carried the burden, matching up with every other top player, playing the most hard-fought games of any of the Vassar squad. Having some spectacular wins and narrow losses, Noah was optimistic about the future, hoping to come back the following year with an expert rating of his own. Mayur, the second player, fought off rivals again and again, and played a dynamic game in order to support Kulick. Gonzalez, the third member, secured a win for the team nearly every game, without a single loss. The last player, a non-Vassar student only known as Bernie, lost all but one game, but his assistance was greatly appreciated. He was gracious enough to help us when we couldnt convince some of the other chess players on campus to accompany us, says Gonzalez, I think if we could get VSA funding to go to tournaments instead of having people spend their own resources, we could put together more teams. Past efforts to get VSA recognition for a campus chess club have failed, but now, with a lustrous trophy in hand, a renewed attempt to receive funding will hopefully be more successful. At the end of the tournament, Vassar attained third-place, behind two Princeton teams but ahead of Duke and Columbia. Astounded by their performance, Mayur was hopeful that the following year, they could bring two teams and have a repeat performance. With these optimistic thoughts the team returned to campus, wishing that the trophy in their hands would be the first of many.

Successful,

Deserving

thE novEmbEr 2011 ChESS PuzzlE

of

Funding

White to move, Best move

Please submit answers to: VassarChronicle@gmail.com Winners will be featured in the next edition of the Chronicle.

Page 14

ChronICLe, february 2012

A Note From Admissions Tragedy Strikes Vassar the Humour Editor A

Todd Densen Satirist Zack Struver Humour Editor

The nexT To lasT Page

terrible tragedy occurred on Jan. 27 when Vassar College erroneously released acceptance letters to 76 early decision applicants. Half an hour later, a member of the admissions staff recognized the mistake, and shortly thereafter the candidates were notified that they were not actually accepted to the highlyselective Vassar College. The news came as a shock to the applicants in light of the new academically-blind admissions program announced late last year (See Vassar Chronicle Volume XXI, Issue 2). From within the Vassar community, reactions to the tragedy (now widely referred to as Admissionpocalypse 2012) have ranged from extreme offense to blunt apathy. An unnamed senior remarked, Vassar teaches us to be accepting of everyone, regardless of race, gender, sexuality, or major. Its really offensive that admissions would correct their mistake and tell applicants they werent accepted based on an arbitrary social construct like academic merit. Another Vassar senior, Millicent Riley Breen III, wondered, Why would anyone want to be admitted to Vassar anyway? Judging from the posts on SayAnythingVC, its clear that Vassar is a hostile, sexist, homophobic environment. Prominent college admissions counselor Dr. James Lightbody echoed Breens statement: Vassar may have actually helped these young men and women by preventing them from making the biggest mistake of their lives. Fortunately, at other institutions, these applicants will only have the opportunity to major in something useless like Communications or Psychology instead of something completely ludicrous like Victorian Studies or Cognitive Science. Vassar officials responded swiftly, announcing several corrective measures. President Catharine Bond Hill announced in an email that Vassar had refunded all 76 former candidates their application fees and that the Admissions Office would be offering college counseling to all affected individuals. After her poorly planned attempts to rectify the horrific situation failed wildly, Hill took the opportunity to step down as president of the college at the behest of the Board of Trustees. Reports indicate that other potential corrective measures may include sending each victim a gift basket every year on the day of the tragedy with a hand written apology note; providing full psychiatric aid to each victim and all their family members; or planting a tree in Israel in honor of the legacy each victim almost left at Vassar. Additionally, ViCE (Vassar iCollege Entertainment) has announced plans for a fall tribute concert. The proceeds from ticket sales will go to benefit the tens of victims of Admissionpocalypse, and all those afflicted by the tragedy will be invited to attend, free of charge. ViCE has revealed that it has already overspent its allotted budget for next year in order to book rooms at the Days Inn down the street for a retreat, where they intend to get away from it all and plan a concert of amalgamation indie-core, trip-wave, and hardcore spelunker rock. Insiders report, however, that ViCE actually intends to listen to a bunch of bands youve never heard of so that it can then

n light of the overwhelmingly positive response to the most recent issue of the Vassar Chronicleespecially from our wonderful colleagues at the Miscellany News and our lovely student government at the VSAthe Editorial Staff has decided to reevaluate and reconsider its primary motivations for creating this publication. After careful consideration, weve decided to reaffirm our commitment to journalistic integriuhh Journalistic intersections? Journalistic imperialism? Oh! Right. Journalistic integration! Thats the one! With this commitment to journalistic integration comes great responsibility. We promise to carefully derive stories from the facts we have, so that our pieces will converge with our vision of the journalists infinite obligation to inform its readership of salient issues. The Chronicle is on an upward slope; you wont find any formulaic, moralistic propaganda pieces, such as those that are found in other publications at Vassar, but rather, dear reader, you will find calculated, concise pieces of journalism unbound by any concern for our divergence from the norm. Thus, I welcome you, dearest of dear readers, to the Next to Last Page which, along with the Last Page, is the Humour Section. Zack Struver 15 is the Humour Editor and Editor in Chief of the Misc.

pay those bands an exorbitant amount of money to put on the worst damned ViCE concert ever. In a public statement, ViCE said, We hope that after experiencing a real ViCE show, the victims wont feel so bad about being denied the privilege of going to see more of them as Vassar students. Despite this announcement, several influential members of the human community still felt that Vassar could do more, which prompted a response from the Board of Trustees. We are really trying very hard to get the college through these difficult times, reported an official spokesman on behalf of the board, which is why the trustees have decided that the only way to truly cleanse the College of this horrible tragedy is to completely clean house and start over. Included in the statement came the announcement that the college was ending its relationship with nearly all of the major officials who sat around and did nothing for thirty minutes while this cruel tragedy unfolded. Those reportedly on the way out include Associate Director of Residential Life Rich Horowitz, Dean of the College Chris Roellke, Dean of Studies Joanne Long, Dean of Students D. B. Brown, all of the admissions staff, and the entire VSA council. Even the admissions building is expected to be demolished and replaced so as not to remind anyone of the incident. The spokesman ended his statement by revealing that the college plans to shut its doors for a few years to reflect upon the horror that occurred within its walls, during which time the college plans to review each of the over 40 million applications of current and former students to ensure that this was an isolated incident.

Milkshakes
Zack Struver Humour Editor

mployees of the popular UpC Cafe expressed extreme resentment towards the new DIY milkshake machines in the Retreat, and are threatening to strike if the Office of Campus Dining does not meet their demands. UpC workers nailed their petition to the door of the All College Dining Center (ACDC) on Monday night. Their Milk-Merchandise Manifesto requests that Campus Dining remove the offending machines from the Retreat, reimburse the workers for all profits lost through the automated job-stealing beasts, and purchase a raw, organic, fair-trade-onlypatent-pendingice cream machine for UpC Cafe. Generally, these fine, upstanding students would be, at worst, ambivalent regarding these milkshake machines. These hard workers always welcome opportunities for a reduction in their workload. Friday nights at UpC--absolute hell. But if nobody goes to UpC at all, then theyre out of a job, said a negotiator for the UpC workers, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issues. Labor needs to organize itself if it wants to call Vassar College safe, he added. In a recent press conference on Noyes

Circle, Senior Director of Campus Dining Maureen King expressed her intent to, find a compromise that will make the United Milkshake and Smoothie Makers Union, #117 (UMSM117) and the Retreat managers both happy and secure in the quality of their establishments. Students and faculty are heavily divided on the issue, causing heated debates on campus. One student expressed elation for the new milkshake machines, stating that, The UpC milkshakes kind of suck anyways. President Catherine Bond Hill could not be reached directly for comment, but her secretary informed us that President Hill canceled her appointments for the day in order to begin planning for an Office of Milkshake Integrity, which opponents fear will be the House of UnAmerican Activities Committee of milkshake-making. A highly distinguished Professor of History confirmed that milkshake production is at an all-time low for Vassar College in his unprecedented third Bancroft Award-winning book, Milk, Modernity, and Multiculturalism: Shaking up the Deconstruction of Dairy Studies: The milkshakes being produced by UpC are even worse than the milkshakes made in Jewett House during the Great Milk Spoil of 1954, when its refrigeration sys-

Melt

As

Heated

tem failed. Others are unenthusiastic about the change. Slow Food Vassar expressed their disgust for the increasing fast-food approach to making milkshakes. Milkshakes, as traditionally made, should take at least half an hour to make. Were holding a workshop on it next week. You

Debate

should come, and bring your friends. Please come. Please. When asked for her opinion, one film professor commented, If you have a milkshake, and I have a milkshake, and I have a straw, and my straw reaches across the room and starts to drink your milkshake, I drink your milkshake.

Erupts

Zack Struver

Retreat Milkshake Machine stirs controversy.

ChronICLe, february 2012

Page 15

The LasT Page

a man who haS nEvEr gonE to SChool may StEal from a frEight Car; but if hE haS a univErSity EduCation, hE may StEal thE wholE railroad. - thEodorE rooSEvElt

Ethan Madore & Pavel Shchyhelski