“
Reed, I am having an
emergency. We need to go
upstairs to your room right
now.”
“Ok, let’s go,” I said to my
friend Michael as I gestured
toward the stairs. Upon escaping
from the party and arriving in
my room, I asked Michael the
obvious question: “What’s going
on?” His answer was far more
complicated than I could have
predicted.
Michael,
who
isn’t
old
enough to buy alcohol, has been
in
a
dedicated
relationship
for the better half of the last
decade. “Okay dude, please just
let me tell you what happened
before you start judging me. You
promise?”
“Yeah, I promise.”
“Ok, so a few weeks ago
I downloaded Tinder on my
phone.” I quickly shot Michael
an inquisitive look. “Yeah, I
know, but look — all I have
been doing is swiping right
on everyone. I downloaded it
because I just wanted to see who
would swipe right on me, I don’t
actually want to do anything.”
I shot Michael another more
confused look about where this
was all going. “Well, I swiped
right on this cute girl and she
messaged me! So I responded
and she kept messaging me. She
is here, downstairs, at the party.
I really care about Sarah (his
long-term girlfriend) and I don’t
want to ruin things with her and
if I stayed down there I think I
would have made a decision that
I would regret.”
The
most
immediate
response I had to this situation
was to think Michael was acting
like just another scuzzy guy
who was trying to cheat on his
girlfriend — and maybe that was
the truth. But, another part of
me saw Michael tangled up in
a much more complicated web
composed of desire, cyberspace
and reality. Michael and I
always joke that the internet
raised us. From a young age,
both of us had nearly unlimited
access to the computer and we
quickly crafted virtual versions
of ourselves.
The first virtual version of
myself was my “Club Penguin”
account; for Michael, it was
“RuneScape.”
In
online
gaming lobbies, people don’t
have an identity they can be
held
accountable
for.
The
other
people
are
complete
strangers who only know you
by your username, creating a
breeding ground for absurdity
and unbounded speech. For
many gamers, usually middle
schoolers, this anonymity is
an opportunity to say the most
vulgar, disgusting and offensive
things imaginable.
For someone like Michael,
who still games on a near daily
basis, this sophomoric behavior
is
no
longer
shocking
or
provocative in the cyberspace;
Michael is completely numb
to it. In a game lobby, people’s
characters
aren’t
real
and
neither are the words that people
speak into their microphones —
dying in “Call of Duty” means
nothing and no one is actually
coming to your house to have
relations with your mother, no
matter how much they insist
they already have.
Creating a character in an
online game is an odd hybrid
between reality and simulated
non-reality. The people are
real, as is everything they
say, but the space in which
these
interactions
occur
is
immaterial.
In
cyberspace,
someone
can try new games, create new
characters and say outrageous
things as much as they want.
The actions I take in one game
have absolutely no bearings on
the actions I take in another
game;
cyber
identities
are
anonymous and separable.
For Michael, creating an
account on Tinder was like
downloading a new multiplayer
game. He was just creating
another virtual manifestation
of his identity that wasn’t
attached to his personhood. Or
so he thought. Michael didn’t
see
his
Tinder
account
as
something that was real — he
didn’t see it as something that
could manifest itself in real life
any more than “Fortnite” could.
Under
this
view,
Michael’s
Tinder account was the same
as looking longingly at someone
in class or lurking on someone’s
Instagram account — acting in
the ambiguous space of desire,
but not cheating. When Michael
saw his Tinder match in person,
the material reality of his
situation set in. This was not the
same type of cyber identity as
“Fortnite” or “Runescape.”
A logical response to this
might be to say that creating a
Tinder account is much more
similar to making a social media
account than it is to creating
a character in a video game.
After all, social media accounts
are
virtual
manifestations
of real people, not simulated
characters,
and
on
Tinder,
someone
depicts
their
real
self.
Tinder,
however,
does
not operate in the same space
of visibility that Instagram
and Facebook do. A Tinder
account is not a public landing
space where anyone can view
your profile, you cannot use
Google to see if someone has
a Tinder; after swiping, an
account can vanish into the
cyberspace forever. Instagram
and
Facebook
accounts
are
designed with the purpose of
sharing the happenings of an
internal life, while a Tinder
account is designed with the
purpose of creating a private
life with someone else. In short,
a Facebook account is always
attached to a public image,
while a Tinder account pursues
a semi-anonymous and private
interest.
In Michael’s state of shock
and panic, he reached for the
buoy that was my room so
that his virtual identity didn’t
drown his real identity. It is
unclear if Michael’s story is
just a contemporary recasting
of an old narrative about a
gluttonous man seeking to cheat
on his girlfriend or if Michael
really didn’t understand the
material consequences of his
Tinder account. Either way, it
is becoming increasingly clear
that our virtual selves are
producing material realities on
their own terms.
*Names have been changed
to
help
protect
people’s
identities.
Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Wednesday, October 10, 2018
Emma Chang
Ben Charlson
Joel Danilewitz
Samantha Goldstein
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
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
ADDISON BASSOCK | OP-ED
The dorm who cried wolf
A
s many may know, the
fire alarm has been
going off incessantly at
the Mary Markley Residence
Hall. While it can be considered
simply an annoyance, many
students believe it has become
a danger. Even though we
understand this dorm has not
been renovated and the alarms
can be set off purely by humidity
rather than an actual fire, this is
now a major hazard.
When the fire alarm goes
off, sometimes even five times in
the early hours of the morning,
it causes students to initially
be alarmed that it is a fire, then
gradually understand it is a
mistake. The third, fourth and
fifth time the alarm sounds in
one day are the times when the
students begin to stop believing
they need to leave the building.
How is this dangerous? It is
dangerous because of what
could occur when there is
actually a fire.
Last week, the alarms went
off six times. I’ve spoken to
numerous residents of Markley,
who all admitted they stayed
inside their rooms. And they
were right to stay there — as
soon as the alarm was turned off
after thirty minutes of ringing,
it went back on two minutes
later, proving to these students
it was only a mistake, due to the
weather or some other accident.
While these students were right
this time, what happens when
they are wrong? What happens
when the alarm goes off for the
11th time in three weeks and the
students don’t leave, assuming
it is another mistake from the
humidity? What happens when
hundreds of students stay in
their rooms, only to eventually
smell the smoke, hear the
screams and realize this time it
isn’t a mistake?
You can’t ask students to
leave every time the alarm
goes off. When the alarm goes
off multiple times in a day, in
a week, it causes students to
stop believing. And this is a
major concern for our safety.
At the University of Michigan,
our tuition money should be
going
toward
researching
ways to prevent the alarm
going
off
from
humidity.
Maybe even some renovations
are
overdue
because
these
issues of fire alarms being set
off multiple times in a night
are not happening in South
Quad Residence Hall, West
Quad Residence Hall, East
Quad Residence or any other
renovated building on campus.
Furthermore,
we
are
only
students. With midterms this
week, it is detrimental to our
health if we don’t get the sleep
we need. When studying until
1:00 a.m. or 2:00 a.m., most
students want to sleep a full
seven to eight hours.
With alarms going off from
5:30 a.m. to 6 a.m., then 7:00
a.m. to 7:30 a.m., and so on, it
greatly disrupts the sleep cycle
we so desperately need.
For the health and safety of
your students, we are begging
for this issue to be fixed.
You, me and my Tinder account
End the Rohinyga genocide
REED ROSENBACHER | COLUMN
Addison Bassock is a LSA freshman.
T
he Rohingya might be the
world’s most persecuted
minority
group.
The
Rohingya are a predominantly
Muslim
ethnic
group
in
Myanmar
who,
for
decades,
have lacked citizenship or any
legal protections. In additon,
their ability to access education
and health care, to travel freely,
practice their religion and marry
has been deeply restricted.
In August 2017, the Burmese
army ramped up its persecution
of Rohingyas to unprecedented
levels. The Burmese military has
systematically destroyed villages,
raped
women
and
executed
thousands. The violence has
pushed
more
than
700,000
Rohingyas to leave Myanmar,
primarily for refugee camps
in Bangladesh. A report by the
United Nations Human Rights
Council has determined that
the violent acts of the Myanma
military amount to genocide.
With no apparent signs of the
violence against the Rohingya
lessening,
and
with
some
countries
sending
Rohingya
refugees
back
to
Myanmar,
something needs be done.
America should use economic
sanctions
to
compel
the
Myanma government to stop its
persecution of the Rohingya.
The sanctions could first target
specific Burmese generals or
government officials, like has
been
done
against
Russian
officials.
For
more
leverage,
the sanctions could be broader,
targeting sectors of industry, as
was done by America against
Iran.
America could use the threat
of precision military strikes
against the Myanmar Army to
deter violence. Actual precision
military
strikes
against
the
Myanma
military
would
be
low risk for American air and
naval personnel given the low
capabilities
of
the
Myanma
military. If none of this works, a
no-fly zone could be established
in Rakhine state, where the
vast
majority
of
Rohingya
live, as was successfully done
in northern Iraq to protect
Kurds from Saddam Hussein’s
murderous Al-Anfal campaign.
Following the Kurdish model,
an autonomous zone could be
established in Rakhine state to
further protect the Rohingya. In
a matter of weeks, the Rohingya’s
situation could be more secure.
It’s clear America is more than
capable of helping the Rohingya.
But
why
should
America
intervene to save the Rohingya in
the first place?
Firstly, America should help
the Rohingya for moral reasons.
In a world as interconnected
and informed as ours, there is
no excuse to let mass murder
go
unhindered,
especially
considering the wealth of options
America has for helping the
Rohingya. But some will say
that foreign policy needs to be
rooted in realism and strategic
interests, rather than solving
humanitarian
crises,
which
brings me to the second reason
America should intervene in the
Rohingya genocide: doing so
would have strategic benefits.
Embracing humanitarianism
would
strengthen
America’s
global
leadership.
American
leadership has shaped the rules-
based, liberal world order since
World War II. The features
of
this
liberal
world
order
include free trade, deterrence
of interstate war and adherence
to international law and norms,
all of which benefit Americans
by making the world a wealthier
and safer a place. But the liberal
world order is under threat.
China is quickly growing in
economic and military power.
Eventually China will achieve
parity, if not supremacy, over
American
economic
and
military power. China is already
converting
its
increasing
strength into global influence, in
competition with the American-
led liberal world order. The Belt
and Road Initiative seeks to
invest in developing countries to
solidify Chinese influence. China
is increasing foreign investment
in Europe with the same goal in
mind, with surprising success.
Military structures are being
built on islands in the South
China Sea, and Chinese naval
vessels have been intimidating
American ships trying to uphold
freedom of navigation, which is
crucial for free trade.
If Chinese power is greater
than American power, America
cannot rely on its might alone to
influence international conduct
over Chinese attempts to do the
same. China’s global leadership,
under its current government,
would undermine and ultimately
replace the liberal world order,
bidding farewell to free trade
and
promoting
dictatorships
all over the world. This would
make Americans and the rest
of the world less wealthy and
less safe. To save the liberal
world order, America should
reconfigure it to genuinely value
humanitarianism.
In Henry Kissinger’s book
“World Order,” he outlines how
strong world orders are based
on legitimacy and power. The
American-led world order has
been anchored in American
power.
America’s
unmatched
power allowed it to write the
rules of the world order through
the creation of organizations like
the World Trade Organization
and NATO. When countries
gravely violate the rules of the
world order, it is America that
leads the charge against them,
like in the First Gulf War when
America led a coalition to eject
Saddam Hussein from Kuwait.
Kissinger writes that force
alone is not a stable recipe for
world order. The world order
set by the Congress of Vienna in
1814 fell apart because it relied
only on force. Legitimacy is also
needed for a stable international
system.
America’s
legitimacy
as leader of the liberal world
order stems from its professed
fidelity
to
universal
values
such as democracy and human
rights. But America has not been
consistent in living up to those
values. America has supported
dictators who violate human
rights and has on occasion
violated the very rules it was
instrumental in establishing, like
when it invaded Iraq. America’s
hypocrisy naturally undermines
its
legitimacy.
America’s
inconsistency gives critics of the
liberal international legitimate
reason to criticize and thus
undermine it. Even America’s
allies in Europe and Asia have
at times become disillusioned by
America’s failure to abide by the
values it preaches.
There is nothing America
can do to overcome China’s
eventually superior economic
and
military
strength.
But
by
seriously
adopting
humanitarianism,
America
could bring greater legitimacy
to the liberal world order. Desire
for the preservation of human
rights are universal. Agreeing to
stop genocides from happening
could be the beginning of a
humanitarianism which would
give the peoples and countries
of the world reason to choose
an American-led world order
even as it is no longer the world’s
superpower.
A
humanitarian
and
morally-motivated
American world order could be
a more attractive option than
the autocratic realpolitik, which
doesn’t even profess to consider
human rights, that the Chinese
government would offer.
Aaron Baker can be reached at
aaronbak@umich.edu.
AARON BAKER | COLUMN
Reed Rosenbacher can be reached
at rrosenb@umich.edu.
CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and op-eds.
Letters should be fewer than 300 words while op-eds should be 550
to 850 words. Send the writer’s full name and University affiliation to
tothedaily@michigandaily.com.
JOIN OUR EDITORIAL BOARD
Our Editorial Board meets Mondays and Wednesdays 7:15-8:45 PM at
our newsroom at 420 Maynard Street. All are welcome to come discuss
national, state and campus affairs.
But the liberal
world order is
under threat
A Tinder account is
designed with the
purpose of creating
a private life with
someone else
Over the past few years, both students and administrators at the University of Michigan
have addressed on-campus sexual assault through new policies and ongoing activism.
More recently, the news cycle and broader times, however, the personal stories of
individuals who have survived an assault can be lost in the bigger discussion.
With that in mind, the Opinion section has created a space in The Michigan Daily for
first-person accounts of sexual assault and its corresponding personal, academic and
legal implications. Submissions will be published as a series of personal accounts that
show essential perspectives: those of the survivor.
Submissions will be due by Oct. 26 at 11:59 p.m. Please submit pieces to Editorial
Page Editors Ashley Zhang (ashleyzh@umich.edu) and Anu Roy-Chaudhury (anuroy@
umich.edu) to be considered for publication. If it is past the deadline, you are welcome
to still submit your piece to be considered as an op-ed.
SURVIVORS SPEAK: SUBMIT TO OUR SERIES