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, September 28, 2015
Rapists. Illegals. Drug traffickers.
These are just a few of the terms used in
recent months to describe people who look
like me. They’re spread through social media,
through talk radio, and through presiden-
tial hopefuls on the national stage. They have
fueled a sometimes nasty, and often inaccurate,
debate about immigration in the United States.
Along the way — amid all the pain and vitriol
— they have created a huge opportunity, one on
which our generation must take the lead.
The current dialogue about immigration
has once again put Latinos in the United
States at the forefront of national discussion.
And the fact that it’s not the caliber of con-
versation our Latino communities deserve
means we have the chance to change it; it’s
our chance to have our voices heard.
As a teacher in a majority-minority city
in California where nearly all of my stu-
dents identified as Latino, I often bonded
with my kids over our shared culture. We’ve
swapped stories about eating tamales around
the holidays and shared photos of siblings’
quinceñeara celebrations.
Ours became a true, inclusive community.
I beamed with pride as my kids welcomed a
new student who spoke no English with open
arms, eagerly translating for her and helping
her study flashcards to pick up the language.
But I also watched with a sinking heart
as my kids navigated situations they didn’t
deserve. During my second year of teach-
ing, one of my students and his older brother
came into school with his head down, looking
shaken. Their parents had just been deported.
As we scrambled to ensure they had a place to
stay, the boys wondered when they would see
their family again.
Reflecting back, I know that my kids’
pain and progress was part of something
that extended far beyond the walls of our
classroom. Across the country, Latinos lag
behind their white counterparts in every-
thing from high school graduation to reading
and math performance. This has nothing to
do with ability or will. It’s a direct reflection
of systemic gaps in educational opportunity
according to race, class and zip code. And
with our country’s entire population moving
toward majority-minority, unless we address
these gaps, we will soon live in a country
where the majority of students are behind.
When I first came to the University, I knew
I wanted to work in public policy, but I didn’t
know teaching would be such a foundational
part of my path. Every day, as I work to advo-
cate for the legal rights of special-education
students, I’m grateful that I followed my gut.
When I learned about Teach For America,
the mission of expanding opportunity for
low-income students and the experience of
working in a high-need community resonated
deeply with me. After three years in the class-
room, I went to law school because I wanted
to effect large-scale change in the systems
that were inhibiting my students’ and their
families’ pathways to success. Now, I’m a
Exceptionalism and diplomacy
Advocating for Latino students
T
he last time a president was elected,
millennials didn’t have the impact
on the election they probably wished
they had.
According to the Pew
Research Center’s analysis
of a 2013 U.S. Census
Bureau report, America’s
generation of adults born
after 1980 accounted for
25.5 percent of eligible
voters, and that portion
should
increase.
As
millennials grow older, the
report states, their share of
the electorate is expected
to blossom to 36.5 percent
by 2020.
As the political relevance of millennials
grows, it will be interesting to see how they
shape 2016 and future election cycles. The
colleges and universities of America have
a long-established tradition as hotbeds for
political debate.
However, assuming their advisers had the
foresight to glance at the voting data from the
2012 election, politicians today probably do
not seek out university venues in the hopes of
reaching out to young constituents.
Pew also reports that 41.2 percent of
eligible voters aged 18 to 24 turned in a ballot
in 2012 — more than a 7.3-percent decrease
from 2008. This pales in stark comparison
to the 71.9 percent of Americans aged 65 and
older who cast ballots in 2012, for example.
Look around Ann Arbor today. Campaign
signs are cropping up like weeds amid the
flyers and sidewalk billboards that perennially
bloom on campus.
It’s clearly evident that “Feel The Bern” and
“Ready for Hillary” signage is more prevalent
here than “Make America Great Again.” The
one time I did see a Donald Trump T-shirt,
it was coupled with a Hawaiian one, and I
assumed it was worn ironically.
As the Republican Party continues to
implode, someone has been canvassing the
University with Democratic catchphrases.
We know it isn’t the students, because if
one applies Pew’s report to the University’s
population, it seems like less than half of them
care enough to vote.
Whoever
the
friendly
neighborhood
Democrat may be, he or she seems to be having
an effect on the national stage. Friday, the
New York Times announced that two and a
half weeks before the first Democratic debate,
Bernie Sanders has built a strong lead in the
New Hampshire primary polls that will hold
even if Vice President Joe Biden were to throw
his hat in the ring.
The resiliency of Sanders’ campaign is
impressive for a man who paints himself
so vividly as a far-left socialist. In the Fox
News era of journalism, where news outlets
are more concerned with political ideology
than the standards of ethical journalism,
it’s remarkable that Sanders hasn’t been
scorned as an enemy of the state or something
similarly ridiculous.
No doubt that Sanders benefits from being a
white man. If he were a minority or a woman,
his campaign and position on issues would be
bombarded by attacks from conservatives like
Donald Trump, who appear to chase doses of
xenophobia with a swigww of misogyny at
breakfast time.
It’s tiring to explain again how Sanders is a
socialist on a mission to take the money power
out of politics and Wall Street. With so much
time remaining before the primary election, it
seems repetitive, but it’s important.
The early success of Sanders’ campaign is
a political miracle that will only grow more
impressive the longer his current uptick in
popularity maintains. To paraphrase the
activist Saul Alinsky: Money and people are the
two sources of political power.
Sanders has alienated himself from big-
money politics, more so than anyone on the
conservative side of the aisle, more so than
Hillary Clinton. And this is what may cost
Sanders as the election grows nearer.
In a typical campaign, candidates spend
months and millions convincing voters to
believe in them. Sanders must spend his time
convincing those who believe in him to vote
at all. His status in the polls is impressive,
but they’re generated by research groups
seeking responses.
CNN might just come to your house, or at
least call you up on the phone, to see which
candidate you’re leaning toward at the
moment, but voting is a totally voluntary task.
If you don’t take the initiative to cast a ballot
on Election Day, you won’t be getting a call
from the county clerk.
Everyone but the government might ask you
how you’ll vote next election season.
The worst-case scenario for Sanders is
if the ones spreading his leaflets across the
country and this campus are the college
students — young people filled with ideals,
but who can’t find their way to the voting
booth. It’s interesting to consider exactly
why a 74-year-old senator resonates so loudly
with the youthful masses, but that’s another
conversation all together.
Because Sanders’ name doesn’t have serious
financial backing (by choice of his own), he
relies solely on the support of real ballots. Point
is, the hashtags are helpful for now, but they
won’t get Sanders the Democratic nomination.
Millennials are a growing percentage of
potential voters, and the most likely to voice
their support of a candidate online, but they
still have disappointingly low voter turnout.
Separate from the politician, Sanders’ idea
of the taking money out of politics serves the
best interest of every individual who doesn’t
own or operate a super PAC. What Sanders
is preaching is that he won’t be bought or
influenced by anyone.
Millennials eligible to vote should do the
same. Cut through gross political spending by
casting ballots — not for Sanders, necessarily,
but for positive self-interest.
— Tyler Scott can be reached
at tylscott@umich.edu.
E-mail in Chan at tokg@umiCh.Edu
IN CHAN LEE
T
he
Middle
East
is
a
complicated place. Divided
by
ethnicity,
political
affiliation
and
religion,
over
the last century,
arbitrarily
set
boundaries have
forced different
peoples
to
attempt working
in unity. That’s
to say, outside
powers such as
Britain, France,
Spain
and
Italy
meshed
competing
interests
together,
fusing their land, resources and
interests. During the transition to
independence, these boundaries
became
legitimate
national
borders. (To be fair, teachers and
students around the world have
rehearsed this history lesson, but
it’s something we must not forget).
Since World War II, many of the
colonizers have tried picking up
the pieces, repairing the strife they
created in the Middle East — either
for national gain, security, develop-
ment or a confluence of the three.
Then came America.
Through arming rebels, sup-
porting dictators or advancing war,
the United States has gone to great
lengths in order to secure its inter-
ests and stabilize the region. Much
of our role in the Middle East, and
the world at large, is due to the
belief in “American exceptional-
ism”: an idea promoting America as
unique in its valuing of individual-
ism, liberty, egalitarianism and the
free market. This concept, while
spirited and momentarily empow-
ering, has led the United States
to militarily intervene when it’s
unjustifiable or unnecessary, acting
often as the world’s police. Fortu-
nately, there are numerous ways to
promote peace, diplomacy and pro-
tect our interests abroad without
using brute force. In short, “peace
in the Middle East” can be achieved
through humanitarian efforts that
develop nations from the ground
up, and welcoming refugees and
immigrants
whenever
possible,
thereby helping people directly.
The current Syrian refugee cri-
sis is a wake-up call, demanding a
reformation of what international
diplomacy in this region — and
around the world — should look
like. In the midst of human chaos
and tragedy, the United States can
have a role in honoring human
rights, prosperity and global secu-
rity. By providing more Syrians
refuge, we can protect humans,
raise our image as a benevolent
world actor and, yes, develop our
own nation.
Unfortunately, many politicians
are unwilling to accept refugees
because they see it as funneling ter-
rorism to the motherland. To me,
that’s straight Islamophobia.
Regardless of your perspec-
tive, though, there’s an important
lesson in this — America’s hubris
has created, or influenced, inter-
national conflict. Specifically, the
concept of American exceptional-
ism has prompted congressmen to
support the bombing of insurgents
and propagate war. But wheth-
er or not you believe American
exceptionalism is justified, it’s still
important to recognize the oppor-
tunity and responsibility America
has to facilitate global security
and development.
Advancing educational, health
and economic sectors, accepting
immigrants and promoting vital
civil societies where people express
and maintain freedoms in the
developing world is our most effec-
tive weapon against terrorism.
Let’s now return to the current
refugee crisis.
We can’t support dictator Bashar
al-Assad as we’ve done with lead-
ers who’ve propagated all sorts
of crimes and rebel groups who —
momentarily — act for liberating
or democratic causes (or simply,
causes that are in our best inter-
est). In Syria, we’ve already spent
$41 million on rebel forces. It’s not
going well.
We can’t send in the Air Force
to remove Assad — as we know the
horrifying power vacuum created
in Libya when assisting in efforts to
remove Gadaffi.
We can’t bomb our way through
Syria with American force, like
Bush’s war in Iraq and President
Barack Obama’s drone strikes in
Pakistan. These actions destroy
foreigners’
trust
in
America.
Referring to drones, in particu-
lar, one Georgetown professor is
quoted saying, “(Drones) have the
right to kill anyone, anywhere on
Earth, at any time for secret rea-
sons based on secret evidence in
a secret process undertaken by
unidentified officials.”
But not using drones and war
tactics doesn’t mean we can’t do
anything for Syrians. We can open
our doors to them.
When discussing refugee acqui-
sition or immigration, it’s impor-
tant to note that taking in refugees
is not a zero-sum game. If America
allows refugees in, refugees will
return the favor. I’ll skip over the
psychological, security and eco-
nomic benefits it provides to refu-
gees, and just mention the benefits
for America. Yes, in the short term
America will pay for housing, Eng-
lish lessons and job training, but in
the long term, this will yield divi-
dends for the United States. Refu-
gees, more than immigrants and
natives, are more likely to start
small businesses. Additionally, Syr-
ian refugees are consumers, and, as
such, will benefit local economies.
The quicker a nation can help them
assimilate, the faster they will help
that nation.
So far, the United States hasn’t
done enough. Since September
10, we’ve accepted 1,500 refugees
and some senators have pushed to
accept 65,000. That’s good, but way
behind Germany’s 98,700 and Tur-
key’s 1.9 million.
On a grand scale, though, Ameri-
ca’s foreign policy agenda is shifting
in a better direction — toward more
foreign assistance and less force;
more diplomacy and less excep-
tionalism. In an interview, Obama
recognized the need to combine
“national security” and “foreign
assistance.” Here, he refers to stra-
tegic efforts — supplying aid work-
ers, restructuring criminal justice
systems and developing economies
— as more critical in the world than
leveraging our military.
Still, there’s room for improve-
ment. Less than 1 percent of the
U.S. budget goes to foreign aid,
while 17 percent is committed to
defense. As the president himself
said, they need to be treated as one
and the same.
Just as we cannot colonize our
way to economic development or
stability, we cannot dominate how
a country operates economically,
socially or politically. However, we
can facilitate development. We can
fund technology, health, educa-
tion and business sectors. We can
invest in economies of the develop-
ing world like China does in Africa.
We can aid in the progress of other
countries as partners — expanding
the global economy and making
things safer for the United States
and the world.
Foreign policy predominantly
run by humanitarian efforts —
educating world citizens, keep-
ing them healthy and raising their
standard of living — has another
implication: becoming a nation for
the good. People will, in turn, look
to the United States as benevolent,
helping the development of their
country. Syrians citizens will want
to travel here, acquire American
goods and make friends, there-
by promoting global safety on a
local and state level, not funneling
in terrorism.
This form of diplomacy isn’t easy.
Diplomacy and global peace is a
slow process.
But there are no quick and dirty
tricks for solving global crises, and
diplomacy is our best option.
— Sam Corey can be reached
at samcorey@umich.edu.
Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Ben Keller, Payton Luokkala, Aarica Marsh,
Adam Morton, Victoria Noble, Anna Polumbo-Levy, Melissa Scholke,
Michael Schramm, Stephanie Trierweiler, Mary Kate Winn, Derek Wolfe
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Millenials must vote
TYLER
SCOTT
lawyer who understands the com-
plexities, the challenges and just
how much there is at stake.
When our national conversation
doesn’t do right by our communi-
ties, it’s easy to get angry. It’s easy
to scream or walk away. It’s easy
to fall victim to doubts that any-
thing will ever change. But it’s also
imperative that we act. We can use
our education and our experiences
to become leaders and shape the
stories ourselves. We can help the
kids that will come of age in the
next decades fulfill their potential
so they can thrive. My students
have all now graduated from high
school and are off to college. I can’t
wait to watch as they help lead our
country to a brighter future.
Resilient. Strong. Smart. Those
are the words that describe my kids,
my family and my community. It’s
time for their country to know it.
It’s time for their voices to be heard.
— Christine Florick Nishimura
is a 2006 alumnus of the Univer-
sity and a former corps member for
Teach for America-Los Angeles.
CHRISTINE FLORICK NISHIMURA | VIEWPOINT
SAM
COREY