Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Tuesday, April 3, 2018
E
verybody
who
went
to
a
stereotypical
American high school
or has even just seen “Gossip
Girl” knows that high schools
have cliques. If you walk into
the cafeteria, a quick scan of
seating arrangements reveals
these exclusive groups: The
jocks sit in the corner booth,
the theater kids sit with each
other, as do the nerds and
the band kids take their food
to go eat in the band room.
Nevertheless,
every
year
there is one kid who shocks
the world and moves from
the nerd table to the jock
table by either hitting the
gym all summer or somehow
getting a girl who sits at
that table (Hey Dan). The
state of world politics is not
entirely different — there are
small exclusive tables where
decisions
are
made
that
impact the whole world, such
as the U.N. Security Council,
the Group of Seven and Group
of 20 summits. However, how
do countries get spots in these
exclusive groups? How can
the nerd (North Korea) get
at the same table as the jocks
(the U.S. and China)?
In the past, nations have
developed their geopolitical
prestige in one of two ways:
the economy or the military.
Some nations, such as China,
became international powers
by rapidly developing their
economy
and
becoming
trade partners with other
superpowers,
such
as
the
United States. In fact, it
was not until recently that
China started to really build
up
its
military.
Similarly,
Germany
became
one
of
the most important, if not
the most important, players
in Europe by becoming an
economic powerhouse. At the
same time, Germany became
extremely
demilitarized
after World War II, and its
new constitution held that
Germany’s
military
would
only be a defense mechanism.
On the other hand, Kim Jong-
un and North Korea have made
another bet altogether. They
believe that the path to the
cool kids’ table goes through a
nuclear weapons program.
On numerous occasions in
the past, Kim has made public
statements
that
basically
make the argument that if
North Korea does not have
nuclear
weapons,
it
will
never be taken seriously as
a geopolitical actor. In fact,
a member of then-President
Barack
Obama’s
National
Security
Council
said
as
much: “If you were the head of
a small, isolated, poor country
surrounded
by
potentially
hostile military powers, you’d
be looking for some way to
ensure your own destiny, too.”
Basically, if you were a nerd
that didn’t want to be picked
on any longer, you would hit
the gym too.
This past week Kim began
his foray into the jock’s ground
by
meeting
with
Chinese
President Xi Jinping. Kim has
already used the meeting as
propaganda for the usefulness
of
his
nuclear
weapons
program. North Korean state
media showed images of its
leader
looking
charismatic
with a large motorcade. In
another image, it appeared
that Xi was making a toast to
Kim. Whether the narrative is
true or not, Kim can now claim
that he was on even footing
with the leader of one of the
world’s most powerful nations.
Now,
to
the
question
at
hand:
Why
shouldn’t
President
Donald
Trump
meet with Kim? At face value,
this meeting seems to be an
unmitigated success — Trump
has managed to do what his
predecessors couldn’t. He got
Kim to come to the negotiating
table. However, by doing so,
Trump would effectively be
validating everything Kim has
done up until this point. Let’s
start from the beginning. Kim
started
developing
nuclear
weapons under the premise
that he would not be taken
seriously by the superpowers
if he did not have these
weapons of mass destruction.
Time and time again, these
superpowers tried to stop
him from getting the nuclear
weapons without giving him
a seat at the table. Eventually,
he was able to advance his
nuclear capabilities to the
point where, in his eyes,
he is now a credible threat.
Consequently, Kim was able
to visit Beijing and meet with
one of the most powerful men
in the world.
Now, he has a chance
to meet with the leader of
the free world. If you were
Kim or the leader of another
smaller nation, what would
you conclude from this series
of events? If you do not have
the
capability
to
become
an
economic
powerhouse,
the only way to become a
player at the big boys’ table
is to become a military power
through
the
acquisition
of
nuclear
weapons.
So,
President Trump, I’d urge you
to carry on with caution and
pay attention to the kinds of
signals you are sending. It’s
easy to get distracted by porn
stars and special counsels.
Especially with what seems
like an endless stream of news
that comes out of this White
House, there’s only so much
we can keep track of, but this
one decision, no matter how
dry, could have implications
for the security of the world.
Trump to meet Kim, why not?
RISHABH KEWALRAMANI | COLUMN
Emma Chang
Joel Danilewitz
Samantha Goldstein
Elena Hubbell
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Sarah Khan
Lucas Maiman
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland
Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Ali Safawi
Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger
DAYTON HARE
Managing Editor
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
ALEXA ST. JOHN
Editor in Chief
ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND
ASHLEY ZHANG
Editorial Page Editors
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.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
The revival of Facebook group culture
IAN LEACH | COLUMN
SARAH NEFF | CONTACT SARAH AT SANE@UMICH.EDU
ANDREW WHITE | LETTER TO THE EDITOR
I
am a dual French and
Cellular and Molecular
Biology
major
at
the
University of Michigan, and
I am responding to The Daily
article titled, “An Open Letter
to the French Department.”
My perspective is different
insofar as I had not spoken
a word of French until my
arrival at the University of
Michigan. I still remember
the first day of French 100
during winter semester of
my freshman year, when my
instructor
conducted
two
hours of class in French and
I understood only two words:
“oui” and “non.”
Critiques
of
the
program with regard to a
heavy workload and tough
grading are unfair. As a
science major, I have taken
many courses in which all-
nighters’worth of studying
is
merely
an
expectation
of the class. The grading is
tough, the workload is heavy
and students are expected
to
take
responsibility
for
their own learning, both in
the Romance Languages and
Literatures Department and
in the Program in Biology. I
am proud to have completed
the introductory sequence in
the French program because I
know the work that I put into
this rigorous program was
accurately reflected in my
grade and in my performance
in the language.
Resources
are
available
to ensure that success is
within reach to all students.
To learn a language as a young
adult is a challenge that is
unique for both those teaching
and those learning. In my
experience in the RLL, all the
lecturers and professors are
rooting for your success in the
language, in their courses and
in life. Assigned homework,
the workshop-style “flipped
classroom,”office
hours
and the Language Resource
Center are all examples of
resources
implemented
by
the French program for its
students’success. The resources
are here for success in the
introductory French sequence,
and it is up to students to take
advantage of them.
Critiques of the
program with
regard to a heavy
workload and
tough grading are
unfair.
Andrew White is an LSA Senior.
Basically, if you
were a nerd that
didn’t want to
be picked on any
longer, you would
hit the gym too.
O
ver
the
past
year,
I’ve decided to join a
variety of Facebook
groups. In a way, it’s the
return of the Facebook likes of
the past. When I was a kid, I’d
like some interesting or funny
one-liner that was, as the kids
say, “#relatable” and then I
would
immediately
forget
about it for something more
important, like the number of
likes my last Facebook photo
received. These liked pages
would show up on my feed for a
few days, my friends would like
these pages and then they’d
be gone forever. Now, though,
these Facebook pages have
taken a different form: groups
that have specific interests or
topics in which individuals can
post in and talk about related
issues. This is fun, but it might
not sound as great when you
realize that this is just another
way to silo oneself into an
information system.
At first glance, Facebook
groups might appear to be a
good thing. It goes without
saying that there are serious
benefits from marginalized
or
niche
groups
coming
together
to
talk
about
common interests. And as
I’m sure your tour guide let
you
know,
the
University
of
Michigan
has
tons
of
those on campus: Whether
you’re interested in political
activism or squirrels, finding
individuals here on campus
that you share interests with
provides social benefits for
the person, including those
aforementioned
Facebook
likes.
These
organizations
can help people acclimate to
campus and discuss common
issues
and
interests.
One
could say Facebook groups are
doing the same thing: People
interested in public transit or
advocacy surrounding public
transit use can find many
groups on Facebook, but I
don’t believe these groups
have the same impact as
organizations on campus.
One of the largest benefits
is also one of the biggest
downsides to Facebook groups.
Because of the huge reach of
Facebook, you can get a variety
of individuals to be a part of
a group. This means people
from all over the country
and globe can join a meme
page. This connectedness is
wonderful, and provides a
meaningful
community
for
some, but it also has a key
problem: information silos.
Like Reddit, we can see how
these
communities
draw
people further into their own
issues
and
beliefs.
Reddit
allows individuals to pick
their communities and only
see information inside them.
I worry Facebook is doing the
same thing. My participation
in Facebook group culture,
which incorporates a variety
of my political beliefs as
well as my passionate love
of memes, has likely made it
where I see fewer opinions
different than my own on
my feed. I consider myself
someone who tries to engage
in politics from all sides —
I am “that guy” who will
comment on a post I disagree
with — and I can say that the
changes and rise of Facebook
group culture give none of
the benefits of a student
organization on campus while
giving all of the features of
groupthink. A Facebook group
discussing public transit gives
all of the benefits without, say,
the arguments one might want
to hear regarding American
hesitancy of raising taxes and
how we might have to give up
or cut back on social programs
that might be hurting the
exact group of people we’re
interested in helping.
In the meantime, Facebook
CEO
Mark
Zuckerberg
announced
that
he
is
doubling-down on Facebook
group culture and has stated
his interest in continuing and
growing
Facebook
groups.
Facebook launched its first
“Communities
Summit,”
noting that the goal of the
event
is
to
“strengthen
people’s online and offline
connections.” Zuckerberg is
right that group participation
offline has been declining,
and,
for
over
40
years,
the social science body of
literature has suggested that
we are losing some of those
ties that help bond us together
and make us feel rooted in a
community.
And there’s good reason
for
Zuckerberg
to
create
this
event.
The
divisive
nature of politics right now
is near an all-time high. In
constructing a website that
has an algorithm to determine
what you see, you can imagine
that it is in a company’s best
interest to keep you on the
website for as long as possible.
Since Facebook is free, it
has to sell you, the user, to
advertisers. Reasonably, this
can lead a company to show
you things you agree with
and have you avoid things
you don’t. But, unfortunately,
that won’t help people avoid
confirming
existing
beliefs
and won’t allow for their
ideas to be challenged. An
article
from
The
Atlantic
talks about how, from an
evolutionary
perspective,
having
social
support
far
outweighs knowing the truth.
Having people on board with
an idea had far larger benefits
in a society where social
support meant life or death.
Now? I’d like to imagine my
Facebook likes are, perhaps,
not as important as having
well-founded opinions and an
interest in political advocacy.
But what do I know?
Information
silos
from
Facebook are not new, but
groups are a new iteration
of this same problem. When
Facebook
announced
they
were going to put groups and
your personal contacts as a
priority on your feed instead
of news articles, Facebook
chose confirmation bias over
a diversity of information.
I hope to see a world where
Facebook
is
a
democratic
platform
where
one
can
engage in substantive debate.
Groups
might
be
able
to
increase our Facebook likes,
but they’re certainly not going
to mend the divisive rhetoric
in this country.
Ian Leach can be reached at
ileach@umich.edu.
Rishabh Kewalramani can be
reached at lbdean@umich.edu.
— The City of Ann Arbor’s Police Department Facebook post
preparing students before the National Championship.
“
NOTABLE QUOTABLE
Ours is the worst bed and breakfast
ever. We don’t serve breakfast and
we don’t even have beds. Please
have fun tonight, but celebrate
responsibly. Spend the night at your
place. Not ours. #GoBlue ”