4
Thursday, July 28, 2016
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
OPINION
LARA MOEHLMAN
EDITOR IN CHIEF
JEREMY KAPLAN
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
BRADLEY WHIPPLE
MANAGING EDITOR
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
Sanders and his movement
have separated
S
cience is a human invention,
based on the unique ability
to employ rational thought
toward
observation.
The
Greek
philosopher
Aristotle
championed empirical observation
as the best way to draw universal
conclusions about the world. The
sun rises from the east. Living things
need food to survive. These are
truths which all developed minds
agree upon. However, while a human
invention, rational thinking guides
only a portion of human thought.
Humans have other influences too
— less cerebral and more deeply
ingrained.
Many Americans, especially, often
seem portrayed as rejecting rational
thought. Watching and reading the
news lately, especially about the
Republican National Convention, I
am reminded of how many people
apparently let go of reason and fact
for the sake of their beliefs or out
of a strong emotion such as fear or
determination.
This is an age where social
media and other outlets enable
anyone to voice their arguments
to the widest audience possible,
without the necessity for fact-
checking. Donald Trump has, over
the course of a year, captured the
support of people who have ignored
factual arguments or have been
unable to justify their convictions
for carefully-considered, specific
reasons.
Instead,
they
feel
uncertain of the direction they
see in their lives within a more-
globalized,
unfamiliar
world.
Trump
hasn’t
delivered
many
specific step-by-step plans for
how his administration will carry
out their policies in order to draw
votes, but he also hasn’t needed to.
Equally amazing, if not more
so, has been widespread refusal
in the United States to accept
human responsibility for climate
change through the increase of
atmospheric carbon dioxide to
unprecedented levels and rising
temperatures. Proponents for more
sustainable
practices
hammer
away that 97 percent of climate
scientists
agree
about
human
activities
accelerating
climate
warming. The scientific method
confirms this again and again, yet
it didn’t prevent a U.S. senator from
bringing a snowball onto the Senate
floor during winter in Washington
as evidence for the unlikelihood of
climate change’s existence. As of
two years ago, half of all Americans
didn’t ascribe to this belief either.
Their opinions are rationalized by
something other than science.
Today, the scientific method
and rational thinking still hold
tremendous sway in our society.
The
professions
of
medicine,
engineering and science are among
the most prestigious to be achieved.
Humans have been able to utilize
the rational mind to succeed in some
of the greatest feats in history: the
construction of towering structures,
sending people to the moon or to live
for months in space, and building
the Internet to enable instantaneous
mixed-media
communication
between continents.
This is not a critique of those
who make decisions on divisive
issues informed by something other
than science and rational thinking,
but a consideration of why such
people arrive at the opinions they
have. Every individual has the
mental capacity to think rationally,
but no individual chooses to in all
situations. Even the most utilitarian
of individuals, to some degree, may
cave to their less rational desires.
It’s easy for a supporter of a
cause, like transitioning to cleaner
energy, to portray their opponents
as unintelligent and uninformed.
But those who may not require
the latest science to inform their
opinion often have a deeper-rooted
rationalization. For example, some
opponents of clean energy who favor
the use of fossil fuels have relied
on those forms of energy for their
livelihood.
I remember visiting the tiny,
struggling
Appalachian
town
of Dante, Virginia (pronounced
“Daint”), whose economy has relied
on coal mining for 100 years. Its
inhabitants lamented the industry’s
transition to other fuel sources.
The movement to transition toward
cleaner energy has seen coal as part
of the problem, but investing in the
technology to eliminate emissions
due to coal burning may make as
large an impact in the short term as
beginning to switch the power grid
to renewable sources.
The
decision
by
so
many
Americans to subscribe to feelings
over
facts
concerning
critical
national issues is worrisome. Yet, to
additionally barrage someone with
science-backed data in attempt to
dismantle their arguments proves
ineffective toward reaching common
ground. What then can be done to
create harmony between viewpoints
when those viewpoints are informed
by such different reasoning?
The solution requires patience
and dialogue. Those of us who
rely
on
the
scientific
method
and rational thought to inform
our understanding of the world
should seek to understand the
rationalizations
others
make
to
support
their
convictions.
Sometimes their rationalizations are
very personal. When the rest of the
world believes that Americans value
science less than other developed
countries, what they are actually
seeing is diversity.
—David Mertz can be reahed
at drmertz@umich.edu.
PHILADELPHIA - As the last days
of the Bernie Sanders campaign
come to a close, the Vermont
senator has a lot
to do to unify
the Democratic
Party. All week,
protesters have
marched through the streets of
Philadelphia, shutting down major
intersections and hosting massive
rallies.
Among
delegates
and
protesters alike, rumors swirled
about a potential protest of the roll
call vote, the vote that awarded the
nomination to the nominee.
In his highly-regarded speech
Monday night, Sanders said that he
“looked forward to (the delegates)
votes on Tuesday night.” This
symbolic gesture was possibly the
last chance that Sanders supporters
had to stop Clinton from securing
the nomination, and their votes
would be the symbolic gesture
that they were opposed to the
nomination of Clinton.
One protester I spoke to, who
wished to not be named, indicated
that he felt it was possible for
Sanders to still win the nomination.
As we headed into the Tuesday roll
call vote, rumors swirled about a
potential uprising by the Bernie
Sanders delegates from across the
country.
Tuesday, per the rules of the
convention, a roll call vote was
taken, and in an act of unity, Sanders
asked for a rule change after every
state stated their votes and allowed
Clinton to be nominated without
contest. Bernie Sanders had fallen
in line, and it was over.
Shortly
after,
hundreds
of
Bernie delegates walked out of the
convention hall and occupied the
media tent in an act of resistance to
the nomination of Hillary Clinton
as the party’s nomination. This
means, more than anything else,
that Bernie Sanders has separated
from his movement. All throughout
the convention, I heard angry
statements about people leaving
the party, but by walking out, the
delegates had sealed their fates.
The ultra-progressive wing of the
Democratic Party is no longer a part
of the party, and their insurgency
should be treated as such.
Keep in mind, these weren’t
the sweaty and screaming radical
Green Party and socialist movement
members that were outside the
gates. No, these protestors were
elected and certified delegates
of
the
Democratic
National
Convention.
It’s reached a point that Michigan
Democratic Party member Lena
Thompson said that “It’s up to
(Clinton) to win us over” and that
without that, there would be no
support from Sanders supporters.
Many Sanders supporters are
falling in line, and many are
also facing the realization that
Hillary Clinton is the only other
alternative to a Donald Trump
presidency. However, many more
are dragging their heels to a
notion of an illegitimate election.
Several delegates handed me a
report that insinuated that vote
totals could be off by “sometimes
more than 10 percent,” telling me
that this was due to paper ballots
being miscounted by corrupt party
officials.
There are legitimate concerns to
be had about the bias of the DNC,
especially in light of the recent
e-mail hack, in which e-mails were
leaked from the DNC that mocked
and talked down the Sanders
Campaign. However, there is no
version of reality in which an
elaborate scheme involving ballot
counters took down the entire
Sanders campaign.
During the nominating process,
many regards and congratulations
were issued to Bernie Sanders.
These are all great steps to ensuring
that Donald Trump does not win in
November, but buying into the belief
that “Clinton stole the primary, so
she can steal the general as well”, as
Michigan delegate Alan Benchich
believes, won’t solve anything.
The primary is officially over, and
so is the candidacy of Bernie Sanders.
The platform of the Democratic
Party is the most progressive it has
ever been, and Sanders has changed
politics forever. Now, it’s time to
elect Hillary Clinton and save the
country from the fate it faces under
Donald Trump.
—Kevin Sweitzer can be
reached at ksweitz@umich.edu.
Carolyn Ayaub, Roland Davidson, Caitlin Heenan,
Elena Hubbell, Jeremy Kaplan, Madeline Nowicki,
Kevin Sweitzer, Brooke White.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Overlooking facts
DAVID
MERTZ
KEVIN
SWEITZER