Opinion JENNIFER CALFAS EDITOR IN CHIEF AARICA MARSH and DEREK WOLFE EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS LEV FACHER MANAGING EDITOR 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 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 Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com 4A — Monday, February 16, 2015 Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Aarica Marsh, Victoria Noble, Michael Paul, Allison Raeck, Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm, Matthew Seligman, Linh Vu, Mary Kate Winn, Jenny Wang, Derek Wolfe EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS W hat my friend and fellow film writ- er Conrad Foreman, LSA junior, wrote about “Son of God” applies to “American Sniper”: “Jesus is back. And he’s white. Again.” But John Wayne is also back. And he’s killing savages. Again. In short, Chris Kyle, the all-American hero of “Sniper,” gives god- fearing Christian Americans the orgasm they’ve been waiting for: Jesus, mixed with John Wayne, carrying a gun, killing A-rabs. All this controversy over whether “American Sniper” is U.S. propaganda will be resolved when we recognize the film for what it is — just another Hollywood Western. The classic Westerns, as anyone who’s seen them knows, weren’t too friendly to the Native Americans. See, when the European Ameri- cans had finally settled the American West (that is, settled on top of the Native Americans’ already-existing settlement), the European Americans, who had thus far been nothing but settlers, didn’t know what to do or who to be anymore. So when the caravans reached the Pacific Ocean, and it seemed that there was no further west for the Manifest Destiny to take them, the ex-settlers decided to make movies so they could remember what they used to do and who they used to be. But when these early filmmakers remem- bered what settling was like (that is, when they looked at the historical record), they realized that, at best, the true story wouldn’t sell movie tickets and, at worst, would get them accused of treason. So instead they produced movies that made the genocide the European Americans committed against the Native Americans appear justified. By the time Clint Eastwood put on his pon- cho and cowboy boots, it was no longer “cool,” as the kids say, to portray Native Americans as demonic savages. It was still all right to por- tray the cowboy as a fair-haired, fair-skinned pseudo-Christ on a crusade against something … just not against the so-called savages. So Eastwood went to Italy and filmed some new Westerns and people called them spaghetti (that is, “spaghetti Westerns”). Now, with the coming of Chris Kyle and “American Sniper,” Eastwood has invented a new kind of Western — the hummus Western. (One of Kyle’s comrades literally says that Fallujah, Iraq, the site of Kyle’s first tour of duty, is “the Wild West of the Middle East.”) All the taboo, classic Western stuff East- wood couldn’t do in his spaghetti Westerns, he’s finally done in the hummus Western. In “American Sniper,” the Iraqis have replaced the Indians. Unlike the all-American cowboy Chris Kyle and his comrades, the Iraqis have no backstories. We can watch Kyle slay doz- ens of them because the film renders them as non-persons. Spoiler alert: But when it comes to Kyle, who the film portrays to us as a fleshed-out human being with a wife, family kids, etc., seeing his death would be just too brutal, so it’s censored. Eastwood’s overall project appears to be the same as the project of the classic Western filmmakers: rewrite history so that the white people look justified killing brown people. But there’s an important difference: America is no longer interested in settling like they were in the American West. The ideological useful- ness of the concept of “Manifest Destiny” has expired: She no longer aspires to gain new ter- ritory. The result is far more cruel and vicious. The savages today aren’t savages because they impede upon the United States’ divine right to The hummus Western V oting has been delayed on a set of bills in the Michigan State Senate that would alter the existing legislation for criminal penalties in cases of animal cruelty and neglect. The bills would create three different degrees of killing or torturing an animal, which would increase the maximum prison terms for first- and second-degree offenses. The legislation would also make it easier to prosecute breeders and pet-shop operators who are repeat offenders, and to monitor cases of animal neglect and cruelty that include large numbers of animals. These amendments are nuanced and work to protect animals and create safer communities in general, and as such should be passed and enacted as soon as possible. Currently, under the Michigan Penal Code, all cases of animal killing and torture are classified under the same offense and are subject to a four-year felony charge. These bills would create first, second and third degrees of animal killing and torturing. Also, those accused of killing or torturing an animal, or threatening to do so to exert control over a person, would be subject to a 10-year felony charge. The amendments would create a penalty for breeders and pet shops that have incurred five or more prior convictions and introduce a mandatory minimum of five years of probation for cases of animal neglect or cruelty that involve 25 or more animals, among other things. Researchers have found that threatened or perpetrated animal abuse or killing is common in abusive relationships, with around 71 percent of women with pet-ownership histories entering domestic violence shelters reporting that their abusive partner had threatened or committed violence against their pet. These amendments would address this problem and protect victims of abusive relationships by imposing harsher punishments for this emotional abuse and manipulation. Moreover, studies have indicated a link between animal cruelty and other forms of violence. Therefore, taking animal abuse more seriously could, through rehabilitation, help prevent other violent crimes. These bills would also help create safer communities by imposing a minimum five- year probation for large-scale animal neglect. This change, at the discretion of the judge, would enable animal hoarders to be put on mental health watch and potentially allow for mental health treatment. This solution would be effective, considering animal neglect as the result of animal hoarding is often unintentional, and is indicative of a problem that will not go away without treatment. Codified understanding of the mental components at play in situations of animal neglect, however, should be extended to other areas of the law. Lastly, these bills work to protect valued, yet vulnerable members of society — pets. Violence toward these animals can be viewed as damaging to families and communities. The tiered system of punishment for killing and torturing these animals is logical, as it reflects how penal codes deal with other instances of violent crime. Blanket treatment of violent crimes, and therefore of animal abuse, fails to consider the range and complexity of these crimes, creating disparities in the severity of its punishment. Furthermore, a four-year felony charge is simply not enough to deal with the crime of animal torture and killing, especially considering that this charge doesn’t always result in prison time. Since many non- violent crimes, such as drug use, result in more jail time, it is fitting that these violent crimes should be taken more seriously. These amendments would help to create a criminal justice system that results in punishment more fitting to the crime committed. The existing legislation regarding animal cruelty needs change, and these bills offer balanced amendments that consider the complexities of animal abuse and neglect. If Michigan wants to treat animal cruelty seriously, the passage of these bills should be a priority. L ast Wednesday, your net- work covered the Univer- sity’s Inclusive Language Campaign, a $16,000 effort to educate students on the impact behind common phrases like “I want to die” and “That’s so gay.” Amanda McLit- tle, coordinator of Diversity Educa- tion in University Housing, told the Daily in Septem- ber that the program was an attempt to improve campus climate, after events last school year like Theta Xi’s “Hood Rachet Party” evidenced a serious need to do so. The program went into effect at the start of the Fall 2014 term. Your coverage of the program was fantastic, managing to stir up controversy over an innocuous Uni- versity program five months after it launched. Your video caption, “Uni- versity is dictating what students can say,” met every standard for a click- worthy phrase — incite all of the drama, include none of the facts. A public university “dictating” the speech of its students?! Now there’s a story that’ll rile up those First Amendment defenders. And that’s how your business model works. You fill a niche in the market. As of January 2014, 38 percent of Americans self-iden- tify as conservatives. Yet accord- ing to a 2002 study, 20 percent of journalists said that they leaned “a little to the right,” and just five percent “leaned pretty far to the right.” I wonder how many in that five percent work for you. Your ideology-driven model is working. Forty-seven percent of conservatives list you as their main news source on all things political. Your median primetime viewership in 2013 was higher than those of both CNN and MSNBC combined, and was the only major cable network to see viewership grow between the first quarters of 2013 and 2014. I’m writing to you because you’ve covered quite a few stories about my University recently, most of which centered on issues of speech freedoms. I can’t say they were terribly accurate. Your recent coverage of the Uni- versity’s Inclusive Language Cam- paign was shared on social media by students who were outraged by the University’s attempt to “stifle” their freedom of speech, as one student posted online. And really, who cares that the initiative was based on student feed- back and aimed at creating a more harmonious campus community? Painting the program as an absurd, double-think government plot to indoctrinate American students into not being able-ist or homophobic assholes free to speak their mind is a much better way to ensure high web traffic. All you had to do was splash “Trouble with Schools” across the screen in punchy graphics, and find a student eager to give an interview full of nice, quotable sound bites that corroborated your viewpoint. The end result was a well-packaged, social-media-friendly story likely to be shared by those already holding the views it promoted. In a digital era where publications compete for continually diminishing advertising dollars, the most success- ful stories are those that generate the most attention, and consequent- ly, page views. And so for that, Fox News, you deserve a gold star, a medal of distinction for your contri- butions to the industry. And, if I were a liberal, I would also owe you a big thank you. The right gets more of their political news from you than from any other news source. There are several issues today that would strongly benefit from cohesive conservative policies and leadership. But because it is con- suming the stories that your analysts and writers deem likely to help you retain your vast market power, the party is instead focused on meaningless, non-actionable items like fake free speech violations at a Midwestern university. Eventually, your poor fact-checking and fail- ure to adhere to journalism’s ethi- cal standards might come back to haunt you. Maybe some other Republicans will start to realize that your manipulative tactics do more harm than good for our party. Maybe your faulty reporting will produce a story so big and inac- curate that it will create a scandal similar to the one experienced by Rolling Stone earlier this year. But hey, in the meantime, your antics are sure to drive profits, and that’s all you seem to care about anyway. And so I commend you, Fox News, for your relentless effort to push journalism into an age of click- worthy content devoid of facts, and your unapologetic pursuit of profit at the expense of the party you appear to support. But, next time, would you mind doing it at the expense of someone else’s school? — Victoria Noble can be reached at vjnoble@umich.edu A more humane society Michigan State Senate should pass animal cruelty laws Love for all, hatred for none TO THE DAILY: I’ve always felt safe in America. Granted, growing up as a Mus- lim American in the post-9/11 era poses its challenges, but I’ve always maintained the “it won’t be me” mentality. That is, until Tues- day evening. The news reported that three innocent Muslim stu- dents were brutally murdered in their home near Chapel Hill, N.C. Muslim students. Just like me. Their assailant was a vocal anti- theist whose heinous act adds to the growing list of Islamopho- bic sentiments, protests and hate crimes in America. Let’s not forget that Duke Uni- versity rescinded its initial deci- sion to allow the Muslim call to prayer after threat of financial boy- cott from the likes of Franklin Gra- ham, or that anti-Muslim threats tripled following the release of the movie “American Sniper.” The only combatant to this big- otry is tolerance. I call upon my fellow Americans to stand togeth- er as one, regardless of race and religion, and share in acceptance. In a phrase, I proclaim my Muslim community’s motto of “Love for All, Hatred for None.” Ibrahim Ijaz LSA freshman Send letterS to: tothedaily@michigandaily.com LETTER TO THE EDITOR Dear Fox News Manifest Destiny: they are savages simply for existing. Andrea Smith got it right in her essay, “Indige- neity, Settler Colonialism, White Supremacy:” America has marked Arabs as inferior and deemed them to be constant threats to the well- being of the American empire. So unlike the classic Western, the hummus Western attempts to jus- tify killing of savages and occupa- tion of their land on the grounds that the mere fact of their existence constitutes a threat. Nonetheless, some people might ask, “Was Chris Kyle, the one who lived and breathed, a real American cowboy?” That’s like asking, “Is a Disneyland castle a real castle?” A Disneyland castle is physical, material manifestation of a fan- tasy castle. No castle ever really — materially speaking — existed that looked like Cinderella’s. Likewise, Chris Kyle, the one who lived and breathed, was a physical, material manifestation of a fantasy person — the American Cowboy. No cow- boy ever really existed materially that looked like the Ringo Kid. So what does that make the movie- version Chris Kyle? The imitation of a person who was the imitation of a fictional character. This cycle of representation entirely excludes any reality principle. But still, was Chris Kyle a real American hero? The question is nonsensical. Hollywood invented the concept of an “American hero” (which I interpret as more or less synonymous with “American cow- boy”) to help sell movie tickets. That is to say, an “American hero” exists only in the world of cinemat- ic fiction. There can be no “real” American heroes because an Amer- ican hero, by definition, can only be fictional. But there are certain- ly character archetypes, like the American cowboy, who inspire peo- ple who live and breath. To borrow Jean Baudrillard’s phrasing, when “the map engenders the territory,” it creates something hyper-real — something materially existing but based on a fiction (e.g., a Disney- land castle or the living, breathing Chris Kyle). Thus, ironically, the fictional Chris Kyle played by Brad- ley Cooper is far more an American hero than was the living, breathing Chris Kyle. So, with all this in mind, I ask sincerely: Who would want to be an American hero anyway? — Zak Witus can be reached at zakwitus@umich.edu . ZAK WITUS VICTORIA NOBLE P E R S P E C T I V E S A V I D E O S E R I E S C H E C K I T O U T O N L I N E : michigandaily.com/section/opinion With unique knowledge of issues that strongly affect campus dynamics, students provide a vital viewpoint on the matters that affect them. Perspectives is a video series that uses visual media to highlight student voices and catalyze further community dialogue. SEX. DRUGS. BRIAN WILLIAMS. LET’S TALK. Edit board: Every Monday and Wednesday at 6 p.m. E-mail: opinion@michigandaily.com And, if I were a liberal, I would also owe you a big thank you.