4A -Monday, February 12, 2007 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 413 E. Huron St. Ann Arbor, MI 48104 tothedaily@umich.edu People are always teaching us democracy but ... don't want to learn it themselves." - Russian President VLADIMIR PUTIN on America's desire to spread democracy while supposedly skirting some of its tenets, as reported Saturday by Reuters. JOHN OQUIST I EE S.} 1 . 1 1 $ . 1 iir. e .... ..... ..... .. _ . . ... KARL A. STAMPFL EDITOR IN CHIEF IMRAN SYED EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR JEFFREY BLOOMER MANAGING EDITOR 6 Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. The more things change ... Recent progress by student leadership merits accolades T here are some issues that have plagued students on this campus for longer than the University administration, student government and even this page will admit. But recently, progress on some such issues has been unusually expedi- ent, to the pleasant surprise of our campus's many beloved critics - including us, of course. I WHAT ARE YOU WORKING ON? I THINK IT'S PRETTY SAD THAT THE ONLY WAY TO GETYOU TO AL GORE AND RICHARD HELP THE ENVIRONMENT IS BY BRANSON ARE OFFERING A OFFERING THE PROSPECT OF 21 MILLION DOLLAR PRIZE A MONETARY REWARD. TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS LEVEL S4 AND IM' GOING TO WIN LOOK ARE YOU GOING TO GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE AND HELP ME ORWHAT? A HSMONGOUS AIR PURIFIER? THIS IS YOUR GREAT IDEA?! J --Su Androgynous politics Yielding to repeated complaints by Uni- versity faculty and students, the society formerly known as Michigamua seems to finally be coming around. Rid of its infa- mous Native American rituals and artifacts, discrimination against women and secret member lists, the society about rounded out the completion of its critics' demands last week by finally announcing a new name: The Order of Angell. Granted, it took the hallowed Angell name without the blessing of the family of former University President and Michigamua founder James Angell. But progress is progress, and we look for- ward a more productive campus relation- ship with The Order of Angell than was had in recent years with Michigamua. That shattering change would be quite an accomplishment for any week, but last week brought along another. LSA-Student Government also made some long-awaited strides, finally making good on that prom- ise to revamp course registration - a flawed system that has plagued students for so long that we were sure student government had thrown in the towel. But come winter 2008, some punk sophomore will no longer be able to land an earlier registration time than a hardworking upperclassman. The new system, though not yet fully fleshed out, will increase the number of credit brackets, which should work to the favor of those students caught in the bor- ders of the old credit brackets:It will also group students strictly according to credit hours and dismantle the so-called "random loser phenomenon" that bumped students to a later time slot if their original slot hap- pened to conflict with their class schedule. Talk about registration Russian roulette. Miraculously, LSA-SG has successfully sift- ed through the red tape and overcome the dense LSA bureaucracy to fix this perennial problem. This page's reputation for harsh criti- cism notwithstanding, this is one of those rare instances to bow to the facts and praise these groups for taking these steps. But make no mistake, utopia isn't exact- ly around the corner. Whether it's called Michigamua or The Order of Angell, we still don't know what goes on in those meetings or exactly what the group does for this cam- pus. The society's defense - that the other campus groups are more secretive - is sim- ply naive. Those groups didn't appropriate Native American artifacts for decades. You have to earn the right to privacy. And in regards to the registration change, it is imperative that LSA-SG follow through. If winter 2008 comes and goes without change, online registration will be added to the long list of student issues that get lost somewhere between proposal and execution. Despite these apprehensions, The Order of Angell and LSA-SG's recent progress is a beacon of hope in the pattern stagnation that typically defines student action. It offers us wary editorial writers hope that one day, aging issues like textbook prices; student housing and public transportation will also be solved by old-fashioned elbow grease and pragmatic compromise. She is a female political icon: intelligent, independent and articulate. She is also beautiful, pulling off a style unknown by most female politicians and rated as sexier than Elizabeth Hurley by FHM. She is in a noncommittal romantic relation- ship with another key player in her political party, and he's fathered her four illegitimate children. She is Segolene Royal, a Socialist vying to be France's first female" president. For more reasons than just her gender,. Royal is a revo- lutionary can- THERESA didate for theK French presi- KENNELLY dency. She has - backed ideologically feminist legisla- tion and pushed the political envelope with her foreign policy beliefs - not to mention her receding skirt line. Frenchmediaoutletshaveattempt- ed to further scandalize her by con- ning her into interviews that unfairly portray her politics and treating her more like a beauty queen than a poli- tician. Yet despite the media's obses- sion with her, her flavorful personal life and critics antagonizing her from every angle, Royal is considered the top contender for France's presiden- tial election in April. So why should American voters care about this avant-garde, flam- boyant Frenchy? Royal's popularity in France provides for an interest- ing juxtaposition to how America is receiving its leading lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Royal embraces her femininity, which has not prevented her from receiving the support of her party and of voters who nominated her in the November primaries. In fact, her feminist ideology (shown in her push for legislation making con- traception more accessible) is largely to account for her political fame. But on this side of the ocean, Clinton, who rarely does anything remarkably feminine, is having a hard time getting voters and media outlets to look beyond her gender. Compared to Royal's, Clinton's femininity is practically invisible; any hint of estrogen is masked by the pol- itician. She's about as androgynous a female presidential candidate as any man skeptical of female leadership could ask for. While a proponent of abortion rights, Clinton hasn't tapped into any of the feminist-based legisla- tion that has defined Royal's career, and she remains conservative in both dress and mode of expression. Yet for some reason, most Ameri- can political analysts and media outlets can't help but mention the presidential candidate's gender every five minutes. In some instances, Clinton's femininity has been used to exploit her, including criticism about showingtoomuchskinand notdress- ing modestly enough when speaking before the Senate. In fact, last March, actress Sharon Stone showed con- cern for Clinton's chances, telling Hollywood Life magazine, "Hillary still has sexual power, and I don't think people will accept that. It's too threatening." Sexual power? Clinton couldn't pass for a feminist even if she led a bra-burning rally on Capitol Hill. She has denied even the last bits of her femininity to achieve the political status she has today. So why are the French so much more accepting of their political bombshell than America is of the comparatively modest Hillary? Per- haps America's emphasis on gender in politics and the media's routine mention of how revolutionary it would be to have a woman nominated for president is actually hurting Clin- ton's chances. The fact that President Bush devoted the opening minutes of his State of the Union address to how much America has progressed now that we have a female speaker of the House is enough to show that gen- der has become too much of a spec- tacle in Washington. Women are being treated as novelties rather than equals. But in Europe, female leaders are nothing new, so while Royal win- ning the presidency will still be revo- lutionary, she is not being treated like an anomaly. Her gender just isn't that big of a deal. And Clinton certainly isn't help- ing make herself look any less novel. As her own chief strategist wrote on her website "it is about time this country had its first woman presi- dent." Sayings like this throw gen- der into the political arena where it isn't needed. Either Hillary is quali- fied or not; her gender should have nothing to do with it. As Bridget Johnson writes in a column for the National Review Online, "Rather than waiting all my life to see some more estrogen in Hillary is ideal for America's gendered politics. the White House, I'm waiting to see the defeat of terrorism... And I don't care if the leader who will help us there is male, female, sexy, ugly, straight, gay, black, white, Hispan- ic, etc." While the Royal/Clinton com- parison isn't perfect, looking at the gendered state of American politics, it's clear that Americans have a lot of maturing to do. If androgynous Hill- ary Clinton can't bring America out of the rut of characteristically similar men running the Oval Office, then who can? America needs to get a grip on sexual equality and stop pretend- ing that the presidency will change forever if Hillary is elected. This presidential election shouldn't be about being revolutionary; it should be about who's the best candidate to lead the country forward. And if that is a woman, then so be it. Theresa Kennelly is an associate editorial page editor. She can be reached at thenelly@umich.edu. L ErE SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU 9 B-Side storyfurthersfalse perceptions ofalCohol use TO THE DAILY: Was it an intentional irony to present on Thursday's front page an article about the increase in alcohol citations in residence halls followed by a B-Side story about what "your bar says about you" (Alcohol, drug citations on the rise in residence halls; What your bar says about you, 02/08/2007). Or was this very unfortunate juxtaposition a result of not seeing the overall message about alcohol presented in Thursday's paper? The message sadly reinforced by both arti- cles is that"everybody"is drinking- alot.Even some of the large text on the page emphasizes this -"Residence Hall Debauchery," "Rowdy West Quad"- as if those who don't drink are in the minority at the University. As a research fellow at the University Sub- stance Abuse Research Center, I have seen the results of many studies that show that most students do not drink to excess, most student drinkers are not underage or using fake IDs. Most students wish someone would do some- thing about the disruptions caused by heavy drinking, and most students think that every- one else drinks more than they really do. Thursday's articles do nothing to correct false assumptions. Instead, the Daily buried one probable reason for the increased cita- tions deep on page 3A: A change in the way the statistics are recorded by the University. I find the "What your bar says about you" arti- cle particularly offensive, insisting as it does that everyone has been out drinking regularly enough to have associated themselves with a particular bar, that each of us can identify ourselves among the drinking chumps in the photo ("Which one are you?"), and that the point is not to be social and hang with friends, but simply to drink. I note as well that sexism is implicitly con- doned as concurrent with imbibing ("You want your beer like you want your women"), another ALEXANDER HONKALA fale and dangerous presumption suggesting that women are merely commodities similar to beer. I might additionally point out that the sentence I quote above presumes every reader is male. I am not opposed to the ingestion of alcohol. I myself drink on occasion, but I am opposed to media reports that tend to suggest that the only thing to do in college is drink and drink a lot because everyone else is drinking a lot. If there were a random anonymous poll taken on campus today, I can almost guarantee the findings would be similar to those I mentioned earlier. Most students do not condone impru- dent boozing and wish something would be done to reduce it. Perry Silverschanz, PhD, MSW Alum Creativity can't be taught in even the best schools TO THE DAILY: James Somers has no problem rambling on about what he dislikes about the Ross School of Business (Why the B-School is overrated, 02/07/07). However, his lack of insight on how to actually improve the Business School makes him appear simply bitter about his own per- sonal experience in the program. He writes that the B-School doesn't "produce innova- tors." Can creativity and "thinking outside the box" really be taught at all? How would Somers recommend teaching this? Also, he argues that learning group work is counterproductive and overemphasized. Perhaps he could also propose how things should be done differently? How do "better business schools" operate in a different way? Instead of just complaining, how about provid- ing some possible solutions? Paul Sinkevics LSA freshman ALEX SATANOVSKYV An illegal war on trial This week, military judge John Head barred interna- tional and constitutional law scholars from testifying on behalf of Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada. Lt. Watada is being court-martialed for his refusal to serve in Iraq and for denouncing America for conducting an illegal war. It is no surprise that the last thing the government wants is for the legality of the war in Iraq to be put on trial. We know from the Downing Street Memo that the government aimed to manipulate the facts to build its case for this war. We know from the Niger yellow- cake hoax that it did do so. We know from the Bush administration's utilization of faulty and fraudulent intelligence and the lack of accurate intelligence that it did indeed lie to start a war. Regardless of what the Bush administration did, the military is subordinate to the president in the chain of command. If Watada's illegal war defense is deemed legitimate, the Pentagon must be held responsible for the illegal occupation. This is why the military court is blocking the ques- tion of the legality of the war. Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice requires that a command be lawful in order for disobeying it to be a crime. Were it proven that Watada was obeying international law by disobeying an unlawful order, the war in Iraq would be proven illegal. The post-WWII Nuremberg trials established that following orders was no excuse for committing war crimes. It was ruled that the Nazi soldiers had not only the right but the duty to disobey orders that were ille- gal. This ruling applies to the Watada case. Those issu- ing illegal orders do not see them as such - it becomes the individual soldiers' responsibility to make that determination. However, there is no possible way to acquit Watada on the basis of the illegality of the war without incrimi- nating the entire military for participating in an illegal war. Article VI of the U.S. Constitution binds us to the treaties that we sign, including the U.N. Charter, which bars the use of force except in self-defense. Aggression was deemed as "the supreme international crime dif- fering only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." It encompassed all the atrocities that flowed from the invasion. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan has stated that the U.N. has always regarded the invasion of Iraq as illegal. Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jack- son, who was chief prosecutor for America at Nurem- berg, stated: "If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us." The trial of Watada pits our rule of law against the Bush regime and every entity it has dragged along into its illegal war. The world will not judge Watada, the military or the president for the outcome of the trial - it will judge America as a whole. It is not just Watada but our entire country that stands on trial. Our mili- tary is subordinate to our civilian government, which supposedly is subordinate to the public. This case is a debate over the legality of the war in Iraq. A soldier has a right and a duty to refuse to obey an illegal order. For the sake of our Constitutional sys- tem, we have the duty to stand by that soldier, or else we bear the guilt of negligence toward the rule of law along with our government. If we fail and allow our government to establish a precedent that soldiers can be ordered to commit ille- gal acts, we are no better than any other citizenry that permitted its democratic government to perpetrate war crimes. Now that you know, what will you do? Alex Satanovsky is an LSA junior and a member of Anti-War Action. \( :U + A 5M . 0 Editorial Board Members: Emily Beam, Kevin Bunkley, Amanda Burns, Sam Butler, Ben Caleca, Brian Flaherty, Mara Gay, Jared Goldberg, Emmarie Huetteman, Toby Mitchell, Rajiv Prabhakar, David Russell, Gavin Stern, John Stiglich, Jennifer Sussex, Neil Tambe, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Wagner, Christopher Zbrozek