4 - Tuesday, January 24, 2012
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 0
4 - Tuesday, January 24, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
ASHLEY GRIESSHAMMER
JOSEPH LICHTERMAN and ANDREW WEINER JOSH HEALY
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR
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.
Imran Syed is the public editor. He canbe reached at publiceditor@michigandaily.com.
Youth, assemble!
Anti-SOPA protests should begin activism trend
t's not easy to mobilize the youth, but the sweeping changes
proposed by the recent Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP
Act bills did just that last week. The bills received widespread
attention from the outset, owing to the broad regulations they would
impose on Internet users if passed. However, it wasn't until the legisla-
tion incited protests from Wikipedia, Google and other major websites
that students finally took note of the bills' implications. It's unfortu-
nate, however, that only threatening pirated online content rallied
young people. Youth activism and involvement must affect all aspects
of politics, and the Internet has proven its ability to sustain it.
JEFF ZUSCHLAG
E-MAIL JEFF AT JEFFDZ@UMICH.EDU
So, Congress is passing So, Congress wants
a bill that allows the to pass a bill that
government the power allows corporations
of infinite detention to limit the internet.
without trial. Wow.
That
sucks. IQRAAA
AAARRR
s InGGHHH!
Rashindecision
0
PIPA was introduced in the U.S. Senate on
May 12 and SOPA was introduced in the U.S.
House on Oct. 26. Though the bills' propo-
nents claim that their passage is necessary
to protect content providers from copyright
infringement, many others see the potential
for undue damage. Congressmen, academ-
ics and analysts who oppose the bills often
cite their "domain-blocking" provisions as
the most damaging parts of the bills. Under
these provisions, the government could
block an entire domain name for copyright
infringement committed by a single user. In
other words, if a YouTube user uploaded a
copyrighted video to the site, SOPA and PIPA
would allow the government to block and fine
the entire YouTube domain for a single user's
actions.
Students were relatively quiet about the
legislation at first, but tensions reached a
fever pitch when Wikipedia initiated a SOPA/
PIPA "blackout" last Wednesday for 24 hours
to simulate the legislation's possible conse-
quences. Tweets mentioning SOPA spiked
sharply during the blackout - from 5,000
tweets per hour to an eventual peak at 267,000
tweets per hour in the early evening.
Though the sudden rush of support was
encouraging, it also revealed the younger
demographic's overall lack of motivation.
Nearly half of Twitter users are between ages
18 and 34. The legislation has been available
for review for months, so it stands to reason
that it shouldn't take a show of force like the
Wikipedia blackout to get students' attention.
The attention had serious implications.
Both bills are now on hold and appear to have
been stopped. While the topic is sure to be
broached again, hopefully the Internet outcry
will lead to industry input to find a reasonable
solution to piracy.
There's no doubt that content creators and
providers deserve some sort of legal protec-
tion against creative theft. Unfortunately,
SOPA and PIPA protect content providers at
the expense of domain holders and consum-
ers by holding the whole online community
responsible for the crimes of a few rogue web-
users.
Since young people represent a huge por-
tion of the web community, it's their respon-
sibility to take charge of and protect what's
important to them. The rec~nt controversy
made it clear that the influence of students
nation-wide is strong and resonant. But activ-
ism can't stop after this would-be victory. In
2008, students came out in record numbers to
make their vision of the country relevant in
electing President Barack Obama. Four years
later, the 2008 trend mustbe repeated.
When I first wrote about
the Keystone XL pipeline
last October, I assumed
it was a forgone
conclusion the
thing would be
built. All the
tree-hugger pro-
tests in the world ,
wouldn't be able '
to stop a project
that was pro- JOE
jected to import SUGIYAMA
700,000 barrels
of crude oil a day
to the United States. And I was right
- kind of.
It turns out environmental-
ists have a rather unlikely group to
thank for putting a halt to the pipe-
line - the GOP. That's right - the
Republican Party has unwittingly
thrown a wrench into Keystone XL's
progress with a clause attached to
a payroll tax cut bill, demanding a
60-day deadline for its review pro-
cess. That bill, passed last month,
gave President Barack Obama until
last week to approve or reject the
hot-button issue.
Much to the chagrin of Republi-
cans - who believed lighting a fire
under the proposal would yield a
rash decision to uphold the wishes of
jobless Americans - Obama reject-
ed the project. The State Depart-
ment cited the expedited timeline
as the main reason for the pipeline's
rejection. There wasn't enough
time to fully explore the environ-
mental impact of Keystone XL on
the regions in its path. Though the
decision was ultimately Obama's to
make, the State Department strongly
suggested he deny the permit.
Obama has said that Keystone
XL isn't dead in the water and his
administration was on pace to
approve it before Congress's inter-
ference. There might be hope for
an alternative pipeline in the future
- barring further Republican med-
dling with the approval process.
Russ K. Girling, chief execu-
tive of TransCanada, the Canadian
company attempting to build the
pipeline, has alreadygone on record
saying "TransCanada remains fully
committed to the construction of
Keystone XL," and that they "will
reapply for a presidential permit
and expect a new application to be
processed in an expedited manner,
to allow for an in-service date of
late 2014."
To borrow from College Game-
day's Lee Corso, not so fast my
friend. According to Kerri-Ann
Jones, assistant secretary of state for
oceans and international environ-
mental affairs, it's not that simple.
Expediting the process is currently
not an option, and a new proposal
would warrant an entirely new Final
Environmental Impact Statement,
in addition to the months needed
to process its findings. The Obama
Administration has said it will study
these new pipeline routes, but the
final decision on the permit will be
delayed until after the presidential
election in November.
As you can imagine, this was a
highly unpopular decision among
Republicans and oil companies alike.
The American Petroleum Institute
is in the process of launching a cam-
paign advocating for the pipeline.
The group notes that Keystone XL is
the "largest shovel-ready project in
America" - a fact that will surely be
hammered home during the upcom-
ing presidential election.
The GOP presidential candi-
dates are united under the front
that Obama has cost the country
with his rejection of the pipeline.
Mitt Romney has called Obama's
decision "as shocking as it is reveal-
ing," citing the president's "lack
of seriousness about bring down
unemployment, restoring economic
growth and achieving energy inde-
pendence." Rick Santorum claims
that Obama is "panderingto radical
environmentalists." And the ever
soft-spoken Newt Gingrich called
the rejection "a, stunningly stupid
thing to do."
The opinions of the GOP can-
didates have been well-received
among their Republican breth-
ren, but the fact remains that this
rejection is their own doing. With
ample time to evaluate the environ-
mental impacts of the pipeline and
offer alternative solutions to these
issues, Keystone XL could have
very well been the next big project
for the U.S.
0
Enviornmental
groups should
thank the GOP.
God knows waiting for our gov-
ernment to address an issue can be
like watching paint dry. That said,
a verdict that has the potential to
directly affect the health of millions
of Americans is not something that
should be decided on a whim. Repub-
licans dropped the ball on this one
(though you'd be hard-pressed to get
one to admit it) and they should be
the ones under fire for the rejection
of the pipeline. If they'd only let the
process play out, our country would
be in a position to create thousands
of jobs and import millions of gallons
of turmoil-free crude oil.
- Joe Sugiyama can be reached at
jmsugi@umich.edu. Follow him on
Twitter at @JoeSugiyama.
#1
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Aida Ali, Laura Argintar, Kaan Avdan, Ashley Griesshammer, Nirbhay Jain, Jesse Klein,
Patrick Maillet, Erika Mayer, Harsha Nahata, Harsha Panduranga, Timothy Rabb, Adrienne
Roberts, Vanessa Rychlinski, Sarah Skaluba, Seth Soderborg, Caroline Syms, Andrew Weiner
@BarackObama Speaking at 9:30am?
We can barely drag ourselves to 11am
econ... See you bright & early
"" '"' #Thirstythursdoyhongover
#Thonksforcoming
-@michdailyoped
SPENCER BAILY
Return morals to politics
FOLLOW DAILY OPINION ON TWITTER
Keep up with columnists, read Daily editorials, view cartoons and join in the debate.
Check out @michdailyoped to get updates on Daily opinion content throughout the day.
Waiting for King's dream
We, as citizens of the United States, have
the right to vote our highest officials into
office. Typically, we then proceed to complain.
about many of their decisions so much that
we would have ourselves believe we could
do a better job than those officials who have
made the science of politics their mind, body
and soul. This being said, our system works.
The United States boasts one of the world's
highest GDP per capita, and most of us would
say we are happy. But does that really make
us happy?
Unfortunately, the successes of our sys-
tem, whatever they may be, have falsely con-
vinced society that politicians should lead our
country - even when they have committed
adultery, we would consider electing them to
represent our country. To me, this is disgust-
ing and disgraceful.
I am not a conservative or a liberal. I think
my place is to give more than I receive and to
make all decisions based on morality. As some
politicians would see it, it is completely accept-
able to have one CEO who makes $5 million
a year pay fewer taxes than a worker making
$42,000. This is immoral and unacceptable.
To tax the CEO and redistribute the money to
the blue-collar worker: this too is immoral and
unacceptable. To invoke morals - something
our politicians should advocate - would be to
persuade the CEO that he should contribute
to the well-being of the worker. A moral politi-
cian would help the CEO see he does not need
to make $5 million a year whether he rightfully
earned it or not. This is where one fault of our
system lies.
Secondly, this lack of attention to morals is
due to a partisan political system. When vot-
ing, we are forced into choosing a side; these
two sides have stuck evermore to the ideals of
their parties. This is of benefit to no one. We
should not need liberalism, conservatism or
libertarianism.
Our politicians should be friends. They
should have the utmost desire to make those
who elected them happy, whether it is by their
own ideas or someone else's. Above all, they
should be role models for all of us, and they are
disgracefully not living up to this task.
Politicians should ensure that everyone has
an equal opportunity to succeed. This means
that mentally handicapped students in Ann
Arbor should receive as much attention and
money for their education as those in cities
throughout the country.
They should see to it that the legislation
this country was built upon are upheld. This
means that an attention-grabbing trial should
not come before the trial of someone charged
with a lesser crime. A speedy and fair process
applies to all trials equally.
The examples I have given are simple. They
are matters which can be dealt with much bet-
ter than they are currently, and it is up to our
politicians to make decisions based on moral
standards to change these things. In the words
of author W.E.B. Du Bois, "the vision of life that
rises before these dark eyes has in it nothing
mean or selfish." Maybe our politicians should
consider this before acting.
Spencer Baily is anS LSA Junior.
ast summer, I visited the
Clayborn Temple AME
Church
in Memphis,
Tenn. where
Martin Luther
King Jr. came
to rally striking
garbage workers .,..
at what would
be the end of his
life. The church JOEL
had been the BATTERMAN
workers' head-
quarters during
the strike, which began after two
of their number were accidentally
crushed to death inside a garbage
truck. The rest decided they'd had
enough ofbeingtreatedlike the trash
they handled. But the congregation
has left since then and the church
was closed - the walls overgrown
by crawling vegetation, windows
boarded up, the whole structure
encircled by a chain-link fence.
Next door, the parking garage of
the new downtown stadium turned
its concrete back on the house of
worship, flaunting a Toyota sign,
one of the big companies without
unionized workforces that helped
make the old Confederacy a new
center for auto production. Across
the street on the other side of the
church, empty lots baked in the sun
where buildings once stood. I ate
lunch on the grass outside with a
local NAACP official who remem-
bered King's visit and its tragic
conclusion. He said with regret
that despite the demise of legal Jim
Crow, things now aren't much bet-
ter for many people.
This past Sunday, I attended
the service at New Bethel Baptist
Church on Linwood Ave. in Detroit.
New Bethel was the church of the
Reverend C.L. Franklin, father of
Aretha Franklin, and one of the
greatest preachers of his genera-
tion. Today, New Bethel is still in its
old home, and the sermons remain
stunning. The church's history
room displays photos of Franklin
marching with King and other civil
rights leaders of the era. Outside,
the scene is just as forlorn as Mem-
phis, if not colder. Linwood's busi-
nesses were devastated by the 1967
riots - or rebellion, if you prefer.
In the decades since, the street has
decayed further until only the odd
party store and church remain to
break the monotony of emptiness
along its length.
Martin Luther King Jr. Day is rou-
tinized in present society. It can be
hard to imagine that simply declar-
ing the day a federal holiday took
decades of struggle. If we tune in at
all, we often get pious calls for ser-
vice: bloodless summons to the mak-
ing of ill-defined differences, shorn
of any relation to the deeper ques-
tions that animated King's career.
Even the University's MLK Sympo-
sium theme this year, describing a
"new generation of activism," tends
to wilt without specific attention to
what this activism should affect.
Making the day meaningful,
I would suggest, requires us to
engage not only in celebration, but
also in mourning, to recognize not
merely the triumphs but the trag-
edies the American freedom strug-
gle has experienced since King's
death. It demands we pay atten-
tion not just to podiums on glitter-
ing stages, but also to city streets
from Memphis to Detroit, where
the ghosts of the movement's past
hover uneasily over landscapes of
profound loss.
As Detroit-born historian Kevin
Boyle has observed, America is by
and large a Christian nation, and
King's story has all too easily and
conveniently been transfigured, as
it were necessary, into the familiar
story of Christ. King died for Ameri-
ca's sins, the story suggests, and with
his blood, the stains of racism could
be washed clean. All we now need
is to believe in his ideals, or a subtly
altered principle of "colorblindness",
to find our national salvation. Or so
01
Pay attention to
what activism
should affect.
some would have us think.
Instead of faith in freedom from
personal prejudice, I'd argue that
it is through activism that we can
most surely fulfill King's dream.
In contrast to the Christ anal-
ogy Boyle describes, this strategy
assumes knowledge of the broader
project of social reconstruction
King sought to accomplish, and the
ways in which we've fallen gravely
short of the mark. Among activ-
ists, a frequent warning against
negative campaigns notes that King
chose to give an "I Have A Dream"
speech, not an "I Have A Night-
mare" speech. That is correct. Yet,
we must also face the nightmares
that still haunt us before we can
resurrect the dream.
- Joel Batterman can be
reached at jomba@umich.edu.