Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Friday, April 19, 2019
Zack Blumberg
Joel Danilewitz
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland
Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Erin White
Ashley Zhang
Timothy Spurlin
Nicholas Tomaino
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
A
s the curtain falls on
an era of unity and
diplomacy, I am sure
members of the British Parliament
are asking themselves, “To be or
not to be?” That is, should they
be holding British society hostage
to
nationalistic
policies
that
could send the global economy
into a recession? Well, that is the
question. Just as Shakespeare
meant this phrase to refer to
death, it is more than appropriate
to use this expression to refer
to the death of international
stability at the hands of the British
Parliament.
With the third failure of the
ratification of the Withdrawal
Agreement
paired
with
the
European Union’s strong position
against changing the terms of the
agreement, the chances of Britain
exiting
the
European
Union
without a deal seems probable.
Since British Prime Minister
Theresa May has already begged
the
Parliament
to
reconsider
their decision on the agreement
ratification — and even promised
to step down from her position to
do so — we are left to wonder what
else can members of Parliament
do? And oh, do we wonder. The
actions of the British Parliament
have caused nothing but anger and
confusion.
When I think of all the
things that are going to be lost
from this deal, I am continually
dumbfounded
by
the
effects
that the agreement ratification
decision Parliament has made will
have on the world economy, or on
the integrity of European politics
as a whole. Under a soft exit, the
EU is predicted to lose 22 billion
Euros ($24.7 billion) in income,
and under a hard exit close to $40
billion, which will predominantly
fall on Germany, Europe’s largest
economy and largest exporter.
Britain is set to experience a 5
percent contraction in their GDP,
suffer a loss of 57 billion Euros ($64
billion) in income and probably
suffer a major financial crisis that
would impact the global economy
as well.
Though the British Parliament
forced May to to extend the
deadline to October, it became clear
that the EU would not budge in
making any significant changes to
the more than 550 page document
that was negotiated and approved
by the rest of the 27 countries in
the bloc. Why would they? Brexit
is like an ugly breakup. Of course,
the EU is going to be unyielding
in the terms of the separation.
Think about the integrity of
Europe and the European Union
without the inclusion of one of its
superpowers. The UK leaving the
EU negatively affects the entire
image of unity between Europe
and the EU. They have no control
in the UK’s decision, and still must
bear the consequences.
I, for one, am happy that
the EU isn’t budging. There is
nothing stronger than the EU
flexing its power rather than
enduring the cost that a No Deal
Brexit will bring. How can the
world just bend to the preferences
of the members of Parliament
that
are
already
represented
rather generously in the existing
Withdrawal Agreement? Britain
wanted to leave. Now they are,
and if the world economy spirals,
it is on them. The EU should not
be bending to the interests of the
UK so that the UK can cherry
pick what relations of the EU
they want to keep and which they
don’t. The UK should be the one
making larger concessions in this
deal as it was their decision to
leave. What continues to perplex
me is how taking the deal is only
temporary — yet Parliament still
continues to take on the risk of
taking the temporary Withdrawal
Agreement that expires at the end
of 2020. Let’s highlight that — the
members of Parliament would be
to blame. Prime Minister Theresa
May has done everything she
possibly could to arbitrate this
deal, so if No Deal Brexit ensues,
it will be because Parliament
has not ratified the Withdrawal
Agreement despite incentives to
do so. When the economy and
stability of the rest of the world are
at stake, MPs should be ratifying
the deal.
I can, however, see where
some of the strong dissatisfaction
behind the plan comes from. The
Irish backstop would essentially
keep EU control over trade in
Northern Ireland, and would
keep it bound to the customs
union that the UK so desperately
wants to leave. All of this is to
prevent the border from forming.
Yes, this is an issue as it would
keep extend EU influence longer
than intended. But consider the
alternative. If there is no deal, then
a hard border would will increase
the likelihood of something akin to
the Troubles conflict, which ended
with the Good Friday Agreement,
exponentially. If the UK is cutting
off relations this quickly, of course
this issue will continue to persist
and
would
probably
require
heavier customs and immigration
control in Northern Ireland. It
would just put the UK in a worse
position. I am not sure why the UK
is trying to force a different option
when more harm would likely
occur at the Northern Irish border
with a No Deal option. Failing the
resolution for the third time is
almost as if Parliament wanted to
expedite the damages that are set
to come from the No Deal policies.
And of course, we have
witnessed the political death of
Theresa May in this process. In
an era where our trust in national
leaders doing the right thing is at
an all-time low, May, who has put
her career on the line for the sake
of her country, has sadly become
collateral in this messy divorce.
As May desperately tried to get
Parliament to vote on the only
agreement available, she sacrificed
her entire career as an incentive
for her country to unite over a
decision to safely and securely
leave the European Union. I guess
my astonishment of May’s sacrifice
is the fact that she was willing
to unite her country around
anything — even the satisfaction of
her as their leader — as an effort to
push the UK to do the right thing.
Maybe the only good thing that
came out of Parliament failing the
deal is that we got to see just how
dedicated May is to her country.
The hardest part of this is that
we simply will not know what will
happen. And though I am deeply
disappointed and worried about
the state of international politics
because of the British Parliament,
all I can do is wait. Though most
of our attention is on President
Donald Trump these days, be sure
to pay attention to Brexit, which
is proving to be one of the most
important events in recent history
Times like these force us to call
back upon our famous British
friend Shakespeare, and hope
he was right when advised that
“though this be madness, yet there
is method in’t.”
RAMISA ROB | COLUMN
America’s Islamophobic war on Ilhan Omar
U
.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar,
D-Minn., has received
boundless
accusations
of disloyalty to the United States.
The first round of fury can be
attributed to her pro-Palestinian
views, and callous comments on
Israel that aligned with certain
age-old, anti-Semitic conspiracy
theories. While Omar should
have
been
watchful
of
her
language, we should note that
she has unequivocally apologized
and said, “anti-Semitism is real
and I am grateful for Jewish allies
and colleagues who are educating
me on the painful history of anti-
Semitic tropes.”
But more recently, social
media
has
shifted
from
antagonizing Omar for anti-
Semitism to demonizing her
with a 20-second snippet of her
20-minute
speech
about
the
9/11 attacks during the Council
on American-Islamic Relations
banquet on March 23. The
speech took place a week after
the New Zealand attacks, where
Omar made the case for Muslim
activism — while many protesters
gathered outside and chanted,
“Burn the Koran,” “Ilhan Omar
go to hell,” and “Shame on you
terrorists.” Such outcries are
odiously Islamophobic in origin.
Islamophobic
onslaughts
equating
Omar
with
9/11
bombings found its inception
before she even uttered a word
regarding the attacks. In early
March, on West Virginia GOP
Day, a poster of Omar was placed
in
the
statehouse
featuring
imagery of the 2001 massacre
and captioned, “‘Never forget’-
you said.. I am proof - you have
forgotten.” On March 21, prior to
her speech at the CAIR banquet,
a man from New York called
Omar’s office and told her aide
that he would “put a bullet in her
(expletive) skull.” He was later
arrested for threatening to kill
Omar.
Last
Thursday,
shallow
journalism
from
the
New
York Post capitalized on this
unsubstantiated
outrage
by
smearing vivid images of this
horrific day in American history
on an inflammatory cover page
— only to vilify Omar. After
facing criticism for irresponsible
reporting, the editorial board of
the New York Post tried to justify
their errors by stating, “What’s
out of context? She claimed that
Muslim civil liberties suffered as
a result of the nation’s reaction
to 9/11 — even as she completely,
intentionally
disregarded
the
grim facts of that day.”
The
most
perturbing
element is the willful ignorance
that leads educated adults to
eschew middle school reading
comprehension
lessons
and
misinterpret what Omar meant
in her speech. The context for
her comments was “a speech
about
the
prejudice
against
Muslims.” Extracting a phrase
out of this context to infer that
it’s intentionally ignoring “grim
facts” requires interpreting in
a far-fetched manner that is
optimized to derive offense and
stir conflict. To straighten this
out, Omar said: “Here’s the truth
… Far too long we have lived with
the discomfort of being a second-
class
citizen.
And
frankly,
I’m tired of it … CAIR was
founded after 9/11 because they
recognized that some people did
something and that all of us were
starting to lose access to our civil
liberties.”
It was later revealed that she
misspoke about one part: CAIR
was founded in 1994. She meant to
say it doubled in size after the 9/11
attacks to protect the civil rights
of Muslims who were blamed
for the violence committed by a
small fraction of co-religionists.
What
is
so
ideologically
objectionable about this clumsy
but extemporaneous speech? She
does not assert anywhere that
9/11 was not a terrorist attack, nor
that the perpetrators were not
vile terrorists. Fixating oneself on
“some people,” and “something”
to
purposely
diabolize
a
woman conveys a reprehensible
message of baseless rejection
for Muslim leaders who expose
Islamophobia. Yet, such blowback
is unsurprising in a political
climate where civil conversations
are impossible on account of the
large number of these “outrage
exhibitionists.”
On
Friday,
President
Donald Trump amplified the
widespread
Islamophobic
indignation when he tweeted,
“WE WILL NEVER FORGET!”
alongside an incendiary video
that repetitively pans Omar’s
remarks
with
terrorizing
background music and graphic
flashbacks of the carnage of 9/11.
This disrespectful video exploits
the trauma of dozens of New
Yorkers for a cheap callout to
score points against a member
of Congress. It is these regular
embraces of divisiveness that
emboldens
the
anti-Muslim
rhetoric and ensures it stays
intact against the safety of all
Americans.
But if we are going to
censure statements, then we
should also be appalled by
Trump’s comments during the
9/11 attacks. When asked about
the damages to his building,
Trump responded, “It was an
amazing phone call, 40 Wall
Street actually was the second-
tallest building in downtown
Manhattan, and it was actually
before the World Trade Center
the tallest, and then when
they built the World Trade
Center it became known as
the
second-tallest,
and
now
it’s the tallest.” Whether this
constitutes bragging is subject
to interpretation, as Trump
supporters
on
Twitter
have
argued. At the same time, they
hypocritically saluted Trump’s
hate
incitement,
one
that
prohibited the slightest context
for Omar’s remarks.
To counter backlash, Omar
quoted the Washington Post’s
fact checker that concluded
her remarks were reminiscent
of
President
George
Bush’s
“bullhorn speech.” In one of
the
top
replies,
right-wing
businessman Dennis Michael
Lynch wrote, “I must set you
straight dear because you are way
out of line. America was always
founded upon Judeo-Christian
principles, not the Koran. Unlike
Muslims who are taught to kill
infidels, AMERICANS...” This
irrelevant,
ghastly
response
ignores that Omar’s tweet does
not suggest America was founded
on the Quran. Omar simply
implies that she is receiving
strident scrutiny for being a
Muslim.
Furthermore,
the
bullies claiming that Muslims
are “taught to kill infidels”
vehemently
demonstrate
the
Islamophobia she is referring to.
The U.S. is supposed to be
a nation founded on religious
liberty as enshrined in the
freedom of religion clause in
the First Amendment. Yet, even
in 2019, people are alienating
Muslims by unconstitutionally
and
authoritatively
asserting
superiority of Judeo-Christian
principles. What’s next — falsely
insisting
unknown
“Muslim
enemies”
were
involved
in
the devastating Notre Dame
cathedral fire in Paris, just to
belittle
Muslim
leaders
and
intensify Islamophobia? This is
ridiculous.
Anti-Muslim
echoes
in
social media signify that Omar’s
unpolished words wouldn’t have
been so horrendously decried if
she wasn’t an outspoken Muslim.
This detestable fact reflects a
brazen double standard and
it is our civic responsibility to
condemn such racist narratives
that alienate individuals and
weaponize faith. Yet, I find it
futile to carol, “We should all
fight against Islamophobia and
hate,” as no one is remotely
willing to listen.
The truth is people only hear
what they want to hear. Thus,
I will not reference the book,
“Behind the Backlash: Muslim
Americans After 9/11” by Lori
Peek so people can learn how
discrimination against innocent
Muslims
skyrocketed
after
9/11 attacks. I will not explain
how exposing this fact does
not translate to denigrating the
tragic incident. I will not remind
people that Muslims, ranging
all ages, died in 9/11 attacks.
I will not list Muslim victims
of
countless
other
attacks,
including one where Muslim kids
from my neighborhood lost their
young lives to Islamic terrorism.
And I will not mention that it’s
more impertinent to circulate
images of 9/11 than saying “some
people did something,” because
everyone should already know all
of this or at least have the human
decency to show willingness to
grasp it.
But how do we get to the
bottom of this anti-Ilhan Omar
narrative? One answer is Omar
outrightly stating that she does
not repudiate the viciousness of
9/11 attacks (even if it’s implicit
in her comments), and that
she
co-sponsors
9/11
victim
compensation fund. Yet, U.S.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
D-N.Y.,
has
already
pointed
this out, but many people love
defaming her as well. A peaceful
conclusion is only possible if
people are willing to listen
to any plausible explanation
without sprouting empty threats
and thrusting dialogues into a
cauldron of partisan politics.
Reaching a substantive solution
requires
every
individual,
regardless
of
political
or
religious ideology, to recognize
that America is a diverse nation,
where brewing such pointless
resentment
will
shatter
the
tolerance and unity that exists
today.
S
uccess has not only been
ingrained in me because
I am a competitive and
driven person, but it is also my
duty because I am the daughter
of an immigrant. Going away to
top a university and being the
first in my family to do so, was a
pretty big deal at the time. From
the old days where I skipped nap
time to do extra math problems
to having over 30 of my family
members show up to my high
school graduation, I knew there
were high expectations for me.
My parents made great sacrifices
not only to be in this country, but
also for me to be able to receive
the best education I possibly can.
The culture shock I faced as a
first-generation minority woman
within my first semester of college
was also met with the shock that
I was no longer on top, and that
everyone around me also came
from places where they were the
best of the best. I spent a lot of
time coping with this and trying
to accept it. Much of my freshman
year was spent in my dorm room
— crying or sleeping — because I
couldn’t come to terms with the
idea that I might not be meeting
these expectations of breaking
barriers.
Every time I didn’t do as well
as I wanted to in school, or any
time I wasn’t the “best,” I thought
of my dad, who lived out his
American Dream and wanted to
continue the progression of said
dream through me. I thought of
my mother, who could not have
the same opportunity of going to
college like me and who I knew
wanted
to
live
vicariously
through me. Through my college
career, I wanted to achieve the
impossible. Coming onto this
campus my freshman year, I knew
I needed to take advantage of
every resource and opportunity
that I could find on this campus.
It is possible to be the best — to
be the best versions of ourselves
possible. It is time to break the
generational curse surrounding
mental health and stop the cycles
of self-hatred and guilt of putting
happiness first.
I felt like I had no room for
mistakes, no time for falling
behind. I felt like this was my
one opportunity and I couldn’t do
anything to possibly mess it up. I
beat myself over every little thing
that went wrong. I blamed myself
for not trying hard enough. I told
myself I wasn’t good enough. I
convinced myself that I was a
failure. Most importantly, I drove
myself crazy over all the pressure.
The best and nothing less is
what immigrant parents expect
for their children. The pressure
to be the “best,” however, is not
always easy to cope with. While
setting
high
expectations
is
important in achieving success, it
isn’t always possible to meet such
expectations. Compared to our
peers, students with immigrant
parents face a perpetual state of
guilt. Despite our hard work and
dedication, we sometimes feel
we are not enough and that we
should feel guilty for not being
good enough.
When this guilt manifests
into more than just feeling bad
after getting a bad grade and
reaches the point of affecting
our mental health, students with
immigrant parents feel even
more like failures and even more
confused. To many of us, we feel
too privileged to be able to go to
our parents about these kinds of
mental health problems. In their
eyes, there is never anything to
be unhappy about. If we have so
much — from food to money to
clothes — then to many immigrant
parents, there is simply no reason
to be sad. It’s easy to enter a
cycle of normalization of poor
mental
health
within
these
communities. In an essay written
by
first-generation
American
Betsy Aimee, she emphasizes that
the reality is that, “immigrants
learn to live with sadness.” This
suppression of anxiety often
manifests in us, to the point
where we too, also feel like we
have to live in a normalized
sadness.
Just as I came to the University
of Michigan under pressure,
countless
other
children
of
immigrants come to college not
only with the stress of being a
new, confusing place, but also
with the pressure of being the
best in this foreign environment.
Added onto that pressure is the
disadvantages that many of us
face being first-generation college
students and/or people of color. It
is so easy for us to fall into this
trap of “imposter syndrome” —
the idea that we are imposters
on this campus because we do
not belong here and that we are
not supposed to belong here.
Research has shown that first-
generation and underrepresented
minority students face obstacles
that hinder their academic and
professional success. I constantly
felt and continue to feel like I’m
faking it and that it’ll only be
a matter of time before others
realize it. We don’t have the
generational privileges of many
of our peers. We don’t have the
same access to opportunities as
many of our peers. We simply face
the reality of others not wanting
to see us winning.
If there’s one thing I know, it is
that I want to make my immigrant
parents proud. No amount of
“thank yous” could ever possibly
express my gratitude for them.
They’ve instilled the best work
ethic in me and much more just
to give me the best life possible.
Despite the pressure, I hope to
proudly continue their legacy and
their American Dream.
Doing your best among the “Leaders and the Best”
Ramisa Rob can be reached at
rfrob@umich.edu.
How confusion on Brexit is Parliament’s fault
MARIA ULAYYET | COLUMN
Maria Ulayyet can be reached at
mulayyet@umich.edu.
Amibka Sinha can be reached at
ambikavs@umich.edu.
AMBIKA SINHA | COLUMN
The U.S. is
supposed to be a
nation founded on
religious liberty