Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Wednesday, March 20, 2019
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
Erin White
FINNTAN STORER
Managing Editor
Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
MAYA GOLDMAN
Editor in Chief
MAGDALENA MIHAYLOVA
AND JOEL DANILEWITZ
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
Meanwhile,
the
humanitarian
crisis
in
Venezuela continues. Citizens
still face food shortages and
power
outages.
This
has
drawn the attention of the
international
community,
with aid from across the
world flowing to the borders.
The U.S., along with the a
large part of the international
community,
backs
Guaidó
as the current Venezuelan
president, which has added
another political dimension
to the crisis. This tension
has also been exacerbated
by the long and turbulent
past between the U.S. and
Venezuela, with Maduro even
refusing to accept U.S. aid as
a result. Ultimately, however,
the most pressing aspect of
the crisis is the miserable
shortage of basic goods and
freedoms
the
Venezuelan
people have endured. At this
point, inaction is tantamount
to complicity; the U.S. has a
responsibility to address the
crisis. By collaborating with
regional
and
international
actors,
the
U.S.
can
help
establish a truly free and fair
presidential
re-election
as
soon as possible and thereby
minimize the possibility of
further Venezuelan suffering.
The most important and
pressing fact is that the people
of Venezuela are currently
fighting for survival. Citizens
lack basic access to food and
medical services and are facing
a national blackout. The U.S.
ought to continue to do what
it can as an economic and
political power to provide aid
to the Venezuelans. We at The
Daily feel it is important that
this aid be distributed for the
sole purpose of humanitarian
assistance and not as a tool
in
disrupting
Maduro
or
furthering domestic political
agendas.
Recently,
Trump
has erroneously blamed the
current dismal conditions of
Venezuela on socialism, rather
than resource dependency and
economic
mismanagement.
This
only
worsens
the
politicization of the problem.
Furthermore,
Venezuelans
are being denied aid due their
country’s turbulent political
history with the U.S., so any
sense that American aid is
simply
cover
for
political
interference
could
lead
to
continued denial of aid for
Venezuelans. Approaching the
immediate problem at hand
will take cooperation on both
sides to ensure the quickest
and most efficient resolution
possible.
This
also
means
that
Maduro will need to step up
and put his own politics aside
in order to help the people
of his country. Maduro often
invokes the idea of “patria,”
or fatherland, to justify his
rule. If this is truly the case, he
ought to do whatever it takes
to provide Venezuela’s citizens
with the most basic needs of
food, medicine and basic living
standards. As we have stressed
with
regard
to
the
U.S.
government, the Venezuelan
government — including both
Maduro and the opposition
— should put aside political
agendas in order to ensure the
livelihoods of its citizens.
Beyond
the
immediate
humanitarian issue, however,
it
is
increasingly
evident
that the root of Venezuela’s
problems is intertwined with
a
violent
political
history.
The international community
must tread carefully in the
fashion by which it provides
aid
and/or
intervenes
in
Venezuela. We encourage the
United States to reflect on
its complicated relationship
and past involvement in Latin
America, and caution against
military
or
imperialistic
intervention. To go in and
determine the presidency by
force would be an excessive
overreach of the United States’
position, and would likely fuel
Maduro and his supporters’
view of the U.S. as a nefarious
agent bent on political control.
Instead, we suggest further
collaboration
between
the
U.S.
and
the
international
community, specifically with
Latin
American
coalitions
that have a larger stake in
finding a resolution, so that
free democracy and peace can
eventually be reached through
fair and uninhibited elections.
The future in Venezuela is
undoubtedly ambiguous, and
we cannot predict the fates of
Maduro or his opposition. What
is absolutely clear, however,
is the immediate suffering of
everyday Venezuelans who lack
basic resources and necessities;
they have weathered enough
human
rights
abuses
to
justify
reasonably-restrained
involvement and aid in their
country. To the extent that
their suffering has been cruelly
exacerbated by political unrest,
it can also be remedied by
political solutions. We hope that
the U.S. can take a benevolent
role in this project and help
establish true democracy in
Venezuela that caters to the
needs of Venezuelans first.
T
he
elaborate,
“Gossip
Girl”-worthy college scam
recently revealed by the
FBI has incensed people across the
United States, with college students
and their parents in particular
expressing the most outrage. The
scam was possible because of
William “Rick” Singer, who helped
parents fake their children’s test
scores,
recruitment
in
college
athletic teams, and even their races
and ethnicities to be accepted into
prestigious universities such as the
University of Southern California
and various Ivy League schools. He
collected over $25 million for his
efforts, and his clientele included
notable celebrities Felicity Huffman
and Lori Loughlin.
Loughlin’s
daughter
Olivia
Giannulli, better known as Olivia
Jade, was accepted to USC after
her parents paid $500,000 for
their two daughters to be admitted
as crew recruits, complete with
staged photos of the girls on
rowing machines. As a social
media influencer with 1.9 million
subscribers on YouTube, 1.4 million
followers on Instagram and various
partnerships with brands such as
TRESemmé and Sephora — which
have since ended — Giannulli has
received perhaps the most backlash
on social media. Her entire brand
was built around an “I’m rich but
still down to earth” image, which
was completely shattered by her
involvement in the scam. Giannulli
has also said in a video that was
uploaded before she began her
freshman year, “I don’t really care
about school.” She later apologized
for her statements in a follow-up
video. Her words have been the
subject of many news reports in the
wake of the admissions controversy,
and many people are angered that
someone who apparently does not
even care about her education was
able to use her privilege to attend a
school over rejected students who
work hard and do care about their
education.
Many students who grew up
watching “Full House” bemoan
Loughlin’s
involvement
in
the
scheme (“I’m so sad, I love ‘Aunt
Becky,’” my friend told me when
she heard the news), and Giannulli’s
subscribers openly mocked the star
through comments on her social
media before she disabled them.
Since the scandal first came to
light, TMZ reported that Giannulli
and her sister have dropped out of
college because “the family feels
certain, if the girls went back to USC,
they would be ‘viciously bullied.’”
As a college student, it of course
upsets me that students such as
Giannulli bought their way into
prestigious schools when there are
so many students who apply to these
schools with true credentials and
get rejected, or receive admission
but cannot attend due to expensive
tuition. Yet, I am almost more
irritated that Giannulli and her
sister gave up their spots at USC so
easily due to a fear of being “viciously
bullied,” if TMZ’s source is correct.
Their ability to drop out of college
so easily showcases their privilege
more than their ability to scam
their way into it in the first place.
It has never been a secret that rich
white folks use their money to earn
their children places at top colleges,
whether it be by making donations
to the school or leveraging personal
and business connections. Singer’s
clients have simply been performing
the same tradition, just in a much
more illegal way. While this doesn’t
excuse their actions by any means, it
makes them less shocking.
So many students, particularly
students of color, face both outright
and covert bullying in schools that
invalidate their right to be there even
when they do not scam their way
in. Such bullying dates back to the
landmark Supreme Court decision
Brown v. Board of Education, in
which
school
segregation
was
outlawed. The Little Rock Nine, a
group of nine Black students who
enrolled at a previously all-white
school in Arkansas to test the court
decision, had to be escorted in by
federal troops. Even today, many
people attribute the admission
of students of color in colleges to
affirmative action rather than their
academic achievements. We have
all heard the argument that the only
reason students got into a university
is because they are Black or another
underrepresented
race.
These
students who have their intelligence
constantly undermined are exactly
the kinds of students defended by
critics of parents involved in the
scam: Students who work honestly
and tirelessly for the chance to earn
admission to a school, knowing that
if they don’t get accepted, there’s
nothing they can do, and that if they
do get accepted, they need to work
even harder than they did before.
These students don’t have the
luxury of quitting school because
of a fear of bullying that they will
almost inevitably face as people
of color at an institution of higher
education. Students whose parents
can afford to pay bribes to send
them to college don’t have to worry
about earning enough money post-
graduation to make a living. Perhaps
these students don’t necessarily
receive the kind of blatant backlash
that
Giannulli
has
received.
However, these students have the
burden of knowing that they can’t
make mistakes, because any that
they do make will perpetuate racial
stereotypes that already undermine
their presence at their school. They
do not have the privilege of buying
their way into school, and they do
not have the privilege of making
mistakes. They do not have the
privilege of dropping out after
funneling so much of their hard-
earned resources into obtaining an
education.
I do believe that the Giannullis
made the right choice in dropping
out. Yet, I wish that the reason
they did it was because they felt
remorse about the situation, rather
than because they were afraid
of being bullied. From the harsh
backlash they have received, it’s
understandable
that
they
feel
scared and mortified. But their
willingness to give up their spots
at USC without even fighting for
them, despite their willingness to
be a part of an incredibly illegal
scheme to be admitted in the first
place, further undermines the
efforts of students who endure
hardships for the chance to receive
an education.
To all parents out there: If your
children don’t get admitted to the
college of their dreams, enroll
them in another school where they
earned admission, and encourage
them
to
submit
a
transfer
application for the following year or
semester. If you have enough money
to bribe college admissions to admit
your child, instead use that money
to hire tutors for your children so
that they can maintain a high GPA
so as not to risk commemorating
their college years with a criminal
record. Bribery may seem like
a perfectly acceptable course of
action in “Gossip Girl.” In this case,
however, do not let life imitate art.
Krystal Hur can be reached at
kryshur@umich.edu.
SUBMIT TO SURVIVORS SPEAK
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. Submission information can be found at
https://tinyurl.com/survivorsspeak2019.
When dropping out is a privilege
KRYSTAL HUR | COLUMN
I
love ghosts. I love ghost tours,
paranormal
investigation
shows, rumors and stories of
hauntings, attributing something
falling off my shelf to a ghostly
presence; I love it all. To be
perfectly clear, I’m not talking
about horror. I have enormous
respect for the horror genre and
its cultural significance, but I
do not derive the same thrill
and enjoyment from consuming
horror media that die-hard fans
do.
But ghosts? I absolutely adore
ghosts. I’m endlessly fascinated
by them, and it seems I’m not the
only one: 45 percent of Americans
believe in ghosts, and 18 percent
of Americans say they’ve seen a
ghost.
What I think draws me to
ghost stories so much is the
storytelling aspect of it all.
The occult combines with the
historical combines with gossip
and rumors to create a lore —
a
hyper-specific
geographic
mythology in which the dead
still walk with us. For relatively
young country, the United States
is positively littered with ghosts.
In nearly every city and town
across America, you can hear
stories about local hauntings
and lore, from Puritans hung for
witchcraft in New England to
aspiring starlets found chopped
into
pieces
in
Los
Angeles.
Specters seem to linger in both
the grandeur of old mansions
and in the dust and destitution of
abandoned mines; in the echoing
halls of plantation houses and in
the fields. Whether you believe
in ghosts or not, we can piece
together a history from ghost
stories alone, a history that reveals
both what we love and fear the
most.
There is, perhaps, no time
in American history more filled
with phantoms than the years
immediately following the Civil
War. The death toll was massive,
with Union and Confederate
forces
suffering
somewhere
between 650,000 to 850,000
deaths combined. That’s about 2
to 2.7 percent of the population,
more deaths of U.S. soldiers than
any in other conflict and nearly
half of the total number of U.S.
soldiers lost in all wars combined.
How does a nation grieve this
massive loss? How do the millions
of loved ones left behind reconcile
the deaths of parents, spouses and
children?
Whether the ghosts were
the product of an overactive
imagination, intense grief and
a desire to communicate with a
loved one just one more time, or the
actual spirits of the dead roaming
the Earth, it seemed that no one
could escape ghosts in America
in the 20 or so years following
the Civil War. Ghosts supposedly
even followed Sarah Winchester
all the way to San Jose, where
she built her large and bizarre
estate. Her husband, William,
was the owner of the Winchester
Repeating Arms Company, the
manufacturer of the gun rumored
to have claimed the most lives
over the course of the war. When
he died of tuberculosis and their
infant child passed too, Sarah took
her inheritance and moved west,
where she began construction of
her massive, labyrinthine home.
The story goes that Sarah had
consulted a psychic, who told her
that death was following her as a
result of all the lives her husband’s
guns had taken. Once she started
building her home, she could not
stop. She had to keep building — even
adding partial floors and hallways
that didn’t go anywhere — in order to
appease the spirits that haunted her.
Sarah is just one story, but it
seems that many postbellum ghost
stories involve women. Countless
sisters, daughters and widows of
the hundreds of thousands dead
during the war seem to have stories
of their loved ones reaching out
to them from beyond the grave.
Sometimes, however, these women
were desperate enough to reach out
to the dead themselves.
Originating in 1848, but rapidly
gaining popularity through the ante
and postbellum eras, the Spiritualist
movement in America signaled to
a new form of spirituality. It was a
movement that rejected the mores
of organized Christianity and the
idea of a go-between God, instead
claiming that its followers could
communicate directly with the
dead. In Spiritualism, there was no
heaven and hell and no God — just
a judgement-free afterlife that all
could access.
Spiritualists held seances and
ceremonies in which they reached
out to the dead, who responded
with knocks and walls and tables
and levitating objects, along with
other
seemingly
unexplainable
phenomena.
One
prominent
Spiritualist and self-styled “spirit
photographer,” William Mumler,
even claimed that he could capture
the spirit of a deceased loved one
on photograph. His clientele was
diverse,
including
Mary
Todd
Lincoln among others.
Many prominent Spiritualists,
however, were women. The original
practitioners from upstate New
York were the Fox sisters: 15-year-
old Margaret and 12-year-old Kate.
Spiritualism differed from other
organized religions in that, well, it
wasn’t really very organized. Were
there a clergy, however, the majority
of its ordained members would be
women. These women were also
involved with other causes, such
as abolition in the antebellum, civil
rights in the postbellum and the
movement for women’s suffrage,
among other things. As time passed
and these movements, already
controversial,
fell
further
into
disfavor, more and more Spiritualists
were brought on trial for fraud.
Strides were made in the field of
parapsychology, and by 1920, the
movement all but ceased to exist.
CAROLINE LLANES | COLUMN
Caroline Llanes can be reached at
cmllanes@umich.edu.
The most important
and pressing fact
is that the people
of Venezuela are
currently fighting for
survival
American ghost stories
FROM THE DAILY
Venezuela deserves democracy
O
n Feb. 18, President Donald Trump issued a statement to Venezuela’s
military: abandon its support for current Venezuelan President
Nicolás Maduro — or else. The president warned at a speech at
Florida International University that if the military continues to support
Maduro, they will “lose everything.” While this ultimatum is vague by
nature, it brings up concerns about how far the U.S. is willing to go to in
order to oust Maduro as president and let Juan Guaidó, Maduro’s U.S.-
backed challenger, assume power until a new election can be held. Guaidó
claims the recent election that re-elected Maduro was fraudulent, and has
since proclaimed himself the interim president until fair elections can be
held — a point the legislature supports and Maduro dismisses.
SUBMIT TO OPINION ABOUT THE EVENTS ON SATURDAY
If you felt impacted by the circumstances surrounding the false
reports of a shooting on Saturday, we encourage you to submit
an Op-Ed to The Michigan Daily. You can send any writing to
Joel Danilewitz (joeldan@umich.edu) and Magdalena Mihaylova
(mmihaylo@umich.edu).
Read more at MichiganDaily.com