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.