Opinion

A

s many begin to head 
home for the holidays, it 
has become clear that this 

year will look different. If you are 
planning to safely reconnect with 
family this holiday season, there 
is bound to be tension regarding 
any discussion from a year that is 
seemingly a simulation gone rogue. 
Despite the largely-acknowledged 
principle of avoiding controversial 
talk at the Thanksgiving table, 
complicated 
conversations 
are 

essential this year more than ever 
before — especially when held with 
those you don’t agree with. 

My family and I are about as close 

as a family can be (maybe even a 
little closer than that). My parents 
are my friends, my siblings are my 
confidants and our family group 
chat — appropriately named “My 
Insane Family” — is inundated daily 
with memes, pictures of my nieces 
and occasionally something political 
or controversial. While we all share 
very similar moral values, it comes 
as a surprise to many who know 
how tight-knit my family is that our 
politics are not all aligned. While I 
won’t divulge personal information 
about any of my family members, 
I will instead use my personal 
experience as an encouragement to 
anyone heading home to a politically-
heterogeneous household. 

Before 
doing 
so, 
it 
would 

be ignorant of me to not give 

recognition 
to 
the 
divisive, 

polarizing atmosphere in which 
we live. Whether it be demanded 
recounts, a lack of concession 
from President Donald Trump or 
the vastly different opinions my 
Facebook feed has seen as a response 
to these actions, it is imperative to 
address the privilege that comes 
with accepting a difference of 
opinion. 

There are differences of opinion 

and then, in a very separate bucket, 
there are values which cannot 
be decided on personal opinion 
and instead are matters of right 
or wrong. For example, while tax 
policy is a matter of debate, the 
right for LGBTQ+ people to get 
married is a matter of values — 
equality, equity, discrimination and 
opportunity 
are 
non-negotiable. 

With 
that 
established, 
rethink 

your Thanksgiving table political 
conversation.

Admittedly, the Thanksgiving 

table is not the best place or time 
for these conversations. However, 
“nowhere” and “never” are also 
not 
sufficient 
replacements. 

Complicated conversations help us 
grow; they allow us to develop our 
own perspectives and attempt to 
see a complex issue from different 
angles. I recommend establishing 
a time and place that feels 
comfortable and open. Sometimes 
the best conversations require 

ground rules to ensure everyone 
feels like they have a safe space to 
communicate. 

At the end of the day, without 

a difference of opinion, the world 
would be mundane and resemble a 
page from a young adult dystopian 
novel. As human beings, we pride 
ourselves on our ability to produce 
and share unique thoughts. If 
we cannot find the power to 
acknowledge the other side of an 
argument, all hope in ending or 
mending the divisiveness plaguing 
every sector of life would truly be 
gone. 

There is a way to have these 

conversations and there are endless 
reasons to have them. So instead 
of banning off-color conversation, 
encourage open dialogues this 
holiday season. Find a safe space 
and be open-minded. 

It can be extremely difficult 

to look past my own ideology 
sometimes. My brother and I 
have been at a verbal duel to the 
death over issues we will never 
agree on. However, I know we 
are both better for having those 
challenging 
conversations; 
we 

exposed ourselves to another 
line of thinking and in doing so, 
garnered a better understanding of 
our own perspectives.

Normalize uncomfortable conversations this 

holiday season

JESS D’AGOSTINO | COLUMN

I

t is past time for the United 
States 
to 
implement 
a 

national carbon tax. Over 40 

governments around the world have 
put in place economic mechanisms 
for 
pricing 
carbon, 
whether 

through a direct carbon tax or an 
emissions trading system. The U.S. 
is the second-largest contributor to 
carbon emissions, yet it is behind in 
the fight against climate change. A 
few individual states have enacted 
carbon taxes. But if the U.S. wants 
to remain a world leader, it needs to 
start taxing carbon at the national 
level.

The purpose of a carbon tax is 

to counteract a negative externality 
that is not already considered by the 
producer as a cost when considering 
the costs and benefits of an activity. 
While people do not intentionally 
release carbon into the atmosphere, 
it has negative side effects that 
impact all of society, such as species 
extinction, 
falling 
crop 
yields, 

intensified 
weather 
patterns, 

damage to coral reefs, rising sea 
levels and more.

Therefore, the government must 

step in and increase the price of the 
activity to make the cost accurately 
reflect the negative societal impacts. 
One of the largest sources of carbon 
emissions is fossil fuel combustion 
from burning coal, oil and natural 
gas. Humans are releasing carbon 
into the atmosphere faster than the 
natural rate. While 40 percent of 
the carbon dioxide we emit will be 

removed from the atmosphere in 
20 years, 20 percent will remain in 
the atmosphere after 1,000 years. 
Already, the parts per million 
concentration of carbon dioxide in 
the atmosphere has increased from 
about 280 ppm in 1750 to over 400 
ppm in 2019.

However, because the impacts of 

carbon emissions are not immediate, 
humans have yet to see how the 
carbon already emitted will alter the 
climate hundreds of years into the 
future. According to a 2019 report 
from the International Monetary 
Fund, an increased price on carbon 
may be the most efficient way to 
reduce global warming and air 
pollution. 

The 2015 Paris climate accord 

aims for a two-degree Celsius 
warming. However, current trends 
point to a four-degree Celsius rise 
in temperature from pre-industrial 
levels. In order to reach the two-
degree Celsius warming level, thus 
keeping the climate livable for 
humans, there must be a $75 per 
ton price by 2030. Currently, the 
global average price is $2 per ton 
of carbon emissions, and the U.S. 
has now withdrawn from the Paris 
Agreement. As a global leader, the 
U.S. must set an example for nations 
across the world and take the 
fight against climate change more 
seriously with the implementation 
of a carbon tax. 

Opponents of a carbon tax argue 

that U.S. exports would decrease 

since a carbon tax would increase 
the price of U.S. goods. However, 
consumerism would likely just be 
reallocated to carbon-free or low-
carbon goods and services that are 
cheaper than the carbon-taxed 
items. Further, some of the revenues 
from the carbon tax that do not 
get redistributed can be invested 
in renewable energy sources and 
innovation. 

Another 
possible 
risk 
of 

a carbon tax is that it could 
disproportionately 
impact 
low-

income 
individuals 
since 
the 

price of carbon-intense goods and 
services would increase equally 
across income groups. However, 
a redistribution program would 
solve this inequity by redistributing 
tax revenue to American citizens. 
Therefore, those with a smaller 
carbon footprint who pay less 
of the tax would make money 
from the revenue and be further 
incentivized to focus consumerism 
on low-carbon goods and services.

If the U.S. wants to pride itself 

on being a world leader, larger, 
concrete steps towards fighting 
climate change are necessary. 
Taxing carbon is a feasible and 
effective method for reducing 
emissions. Congress must pass 
a 
carbon 
tax 
with 
urgency, 

decreasing the harmful carbon 
emission activities in the U.S.

Jess D’Agostino can be reached at 

jessdag@umich.edu.

LIZZY PEPPERCORN | COLUMN

It’s past time for a national carbon tax

Wednesday, December 9, 2020 — 8
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

KAREEM RIFAI | COLUMN

The future of Belarus is female

Lizzy Peppercorn can be reached at 

epepperc@umich.edu.

Read more at 

A

lexander 
Lukashenko, 

“Europe’s last dictator,” 
has brutally suppressed 

mass protests sparked by civil 
unrest over Belarus’s presidential 
election in August. Lukashenko, 
who has ruled Belarus with an 
iron fist since 1994, has managed 
to maintain his grip on power 
by rigging elections for more 
than two decades. No Belarusian 
presidential election since 1994 
has been declared free or fair by 
international election observers. 
With state-sponsored media, the 
Belarusian KGB and Vladimir 
Putin at his side, the Belarusian 
authoritarian has managed to 
effectively fight back against 
internal and external opposition 
to his regime for years until now.

Svetlana 
Tikhanovskaya, 
a 

former English teacher now-
turned 
Lukashenko’s 
largest 

political 
rival, 
addressed 
a 

crowd of her supporters, saying 
that she wants her “husband and 
children back” and would much 
rather “fry (her) cutlets” instead 
of leading a major opposition 
movement. 
Tikhanovskaya’s 

husband, Sergei, was the original 
contender to oppose Lukashenko 
in the August election. A popular 
YouTube blogger and activist, 
he was barred from registering 
and as a candidate and was 
thrown in prison. After her 
husband’s arrest, Tikhanovskaya 
joined forces with Veronika 
Tsepkalo, the wife of another 
barred presidential candidate, 
Valery 
Tsepkalo 
and 
Maria 

Kolesnikova, former campaign 
manager to barred candidate 
Viktar 
Babaryka. 
Together, 

this powerful female trio has 
managed to ignite one of the most 
expansive protest movements 
against 
Lukashenko’s 
brutal 

regime.

Lukashenko’s 
misogyny 

was on full display during his 
campaign, saying that a female 

president like Tikhanovskaya 
“would collapse, poor thing.” 
Beyond his routine targeting 
of 
female 
pro-democracy 

activists, the Belarusian KGB 
went into overdrive to persecute 
anyone perceived as a political 
opponent leading up to the 
election, including journalists, 
monitors and foreign citizens. 
Lukashenko’s 
focus 
on 

eliminating his opposition has 
gone far beyond his attention to 
COVID-19, which he’s dismissed 
as “psychosis.” In accordance 
with 
his 
typical 
machismo, 

Lukashenko 
suggested 
that 

drinking vodka, riding tractors 
through fields and going to 
the sauna would be enough to 
counteract the deadly virus that 
has claimed over a million lives 
worldwide.

Despite 
losing 
the 
rigged 

election, and being forced to flee 
the country, Tikhanovskaya’s 
group of three has managed to 
continue to fuel the mass protests 
for 
democracy 
and 
human 

rights. Following the elections, 
multiple state TV personalities, 
bastions for the preservation 
of Lukashenko’s rule, resigned 
and joined the anti-government 
protests. Students, doctors, the 
elderly and prominent athletes 
and actors have joined since the 
popular movement’s start more 
than 100 days ago.

Diana Pchelinkova, a young 

female 
activist 
from 
Minsk 

described 
the 
brutality 
she 

endured during pro-democracy 
protests to the BBC. As she fled 
from the police, she and other 
protesters ran into an apartment 
building, seeking shelter in an 
apartment: “I was the last one. 
I fell at the entrance. They hit 
my back with batons. We tried 
to shut the door but they pushed 
through.” 

According to her account, 

officers 
stormed 
in 
the 

apartment 
Pchelinkova 
had 

taken shelter in and began 
beating 
the 
male 
protesters 

while the women screamed and 
begged for the police to spare 
them from detention. 

Another 
female 
activist, 

Alesya, who frequently attends 
anti-government 
rallies, 

recounted her experience at 
a protest in early November. 
As 
crowds 
increased, 
stun 

grenades were unleashed on the 
peaceful protesters and police 
hit people with batons. “They 
attacked us again and again. 
It was awful. They ferociously 
beat people, twisted their arms 
and 
took 
us 
away,” 
Alesya 

said. Female leadership and 
widespread female participation 
in the protests aimed at ousting 
Lukashenko 
are 
not 
only 

eroding the old-guard Soviet-
style 
institutions 
that 
have 

kept Lukashenko in power for 
decades but also the image of 
the traditionally ultra-macho 
authoritarian leader.

Tikhanovskaya’s 
rise 
along 

with Tsepkalo and Kolesnikova’s 
feminist leadership has effectively 
destroyed one of Europe’s last 
strongmen, 
as 
Lukashenko 

continues to frantically suppress 
his opposition and likely fears 
retribution 
from 
Vladimir 

Putin in a similar style to 
Russia’s illegal annexation of 
Crimea in 2014. Three women 
have brought one strong man 
down to his knees, and if they 
succeed, 
Tikhanovskaya, 
the 

Belarussian “Joan of Arc,” will 
radically change the landscape 
of the Soviet-style nation, despite 
having to tackle undoubtedly 
difficult challenges for a former 
teacher and housewife, including 
rampant 
corruption, 
extreme 

poverty and COVID-19. 

Kareem Rifai can be reached at 

krifai@umich.edu.

Design courtesy of Mellisa Lee

MADELYN VERVAECKE | CONTACT CARTOONIST AT MIVERVAE@UMICH.EDU

SAM WOITESHEK | COLUMN

A remote freshman’s semester in review

I 

may be a little late on the 
Thanksgiving 
vibes 
but, 

as a whole, the holiday 

season offers time to “give 
thanks” (something we should 
do at least once every day). As 
the semester winds to a close 
and Michiganders prepare for 
another winter featuring hell’s 
elemental wrath, I would be 
remiss if I did not stop to think 
about these last three months. 

Back in the summer, my 

excitement was overwhelming. 
My senior year of high school had 
ended abruptly and I was ready 
for a fresh start. I agonized over 
my classes in July and signed 
up for move-in in August, both 
with an enthusiasm unknown 
to mankind. I figured it was 
only a matter of time before my 
“college experience” began.

As it turns out, expectations 

rarely meet reality. I elected 
to study remotely as all my 

classes were online. I refused 

to cancel my housing contract 
with the hope of returning 
once the number of COVID-
19 cases lowered, a moment 
that never came. My parents 
are 
immunocompromised, 
so 

my options are limited in my 
hometown as well. It’s been 
nearly impossible to salvage the 
positives.

However, I’m not looking for 

pity. Coupled with the University 
of Michigan’s recent housing 
decision, it’s been a tumultuous 
experience for many first-year 

students, even those that are 

on-campus. 
Without 
further 

ado, here are the highs and lows 
from 164 miles away.

The good: The option for 

students to attend hybrid classes 
was inspiring. Although 77% of all 
credit hours were taken remotely, 
some students were allowed to 
enjoy face-to-face socialization, a 
scarcity nowadays but refreshing 

when available. Here’s to hoping 
— out of all our pandemic-related 
collegiate issues — for more 
opportunities 
for 
in-person 

education and interaction in 2021.

Our clubs and organizations 

have been extremely diligent. 
The rush processes for most 
Fraternity & Sorority life and 
professional 
fraternities 
have 

so far been virtual and well-
executed. I am a member of the 
Sports 
Business 
Association 

and we have a speaker series 
every week over Zoom, as well 
as 
professional 
development 

workshops. 
From 
what 
I’ve 

heard from other students, their 
extracurricular activities have 
been conducted in a similar 
fashion. Keep up the awesome 
work, guys.

The bad: The awkwardness in 

Zoom’s “breakout room” feature 
is almost palpable. Unless you 
have a Chatty Kathy in your 
group, chances are the first 
minutes will be spent blankly 
staring at each other in silence. 
Then, when you finally are able 
to converse, the professor is 
already calling you back and you 
have to strategically say goodbye. 
Alternatively, there’s a chance 
your group hits it off! Sadly, 
you’re probably not talking about 
what you were assigned, so that’s 
no good either.

Why the heck were community 

bathrooms 
an 
option 
this 

semester? No less one that came 
to fruition! No one is going to 
reasonably wear a mask while 
showering or brushing their 
teeth and, if Michigan Housing 
thought otherwise, they were 
so 
devastatingly 
wrong. 
I’m 

not suggesting that we go full-
out barbaric and conduct our 
business among nature, but can’t 
we push a little more for a safer 
substitute during this time?

Football season, on the whole, 

has been operating below its 
usual standards. The Holy Grail 
of fall Saturdays currently does 
not exist. Where else would 
you rather be on an Ann Arbor 
weekend than among 110,000 
screaming fans? I get it, this 
pandemic has stripped us of far 
too much, but it still hurts to 
watch the empty, cardboard-
filled 
stands 
at 
Michigan 

Stadium. Plus, if that wasn’t bad 
enough, our annoying neighbors 
to the south were victorious and 
Jim Harbaugh appears lost yet 
again. His team is a measly 2-4, 
underperforming by the most 
mediocre of expectations. He 
might want to start looking for a 
realtor soon. 

A week ago I returned to Ann 

Arbor to move the few belongings 
I had in Mary Markley Residence 
Hall back to my house. It was 
strange coming back. I’ve been 
to campus plenty of times for a 
variety of reasons. Yet somehow, 
on what should have been a typical 
fall afternoon, the place I’d come 
to love had never felt more foreign. 

Then again, this semester — as 

we’ve all learned — has become 
entirely 
atypical. 
On-campus 

freshmen may have had some fun, 
but they’d be cheating themselves 
by believing they received the 
full experience. The University 
is too diverse and enriching in 
its possibilities for this year’s 
freshmen to be satisfied in the 
short and limited time they’ve 
spent here.

For first-years who have spent 

the year at home, it’s okay to admit 
our “experience” was unflattering. 
Make no mistake, it’s felt like high 
school 2.0. We’ll enter next fall 
feeling like freshmen, feeling a 
year behind our classmates and 
a lifetime behind our older peers.

Sam Woiteshek can be reached at 

swoitesh@umich.edu.

