7-Opinion
L
ast year, former Supreme
Court Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg died, and the
Democrats’
nightmare
ensued.
A month later, former President
Donald Trump nominated Justice
Amy Coney Barrett — an anti-
abortion advocate — to replace
Ginsburg, a liberal and feminist icon.
The Republican-controlled Senate
confirmed this nomination.
Ginsburg refrained from retiring
during former President Barack
Obama’s second term, which allowed
Trump to appoint her successor. As
the oldest current member of the
Supreme Court, Associate Justice
Stephen Breyer should learn from
Ginsburg’s mistake. He should retire
now to guarantee that he will be
replaced by a liberal justice.
While
Democrats
currently
control Congress and the presidency, it
is possible that the midterm elections
next year could hand the Senate to
Republicans, giving them the upper
hand on all votes, including those to
confirm Supreme Court nominees.
Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has
already confirmed it would be “highly
unlikely” that Republicans would
vote to confirm a Biden Supreme
Court nominee should they take
back the Senate. While Breyer does
not appear to have significant health
issues, he is 83 years old. Ginsburg
died when she was 87, four years after
Obama’s presidency ended.
The question of Breyer’s retirement
is on the minds of liberals, including
Breyer himself. In response to calls
for him to step down, Breyer has said
that he will retire on his own terms.
He has offered explanations for his
refusal to provide a clear timeline,
including worries that it will increase
polarization, a consistent theme from
him. Breyer argued that “if the public
sees judges as politicians in robes, its
confidence in the courts, and in the
rule of law itself, can only diminish,
diminishing the court’s power.”
While it is honorable that Breyer
cares about preserving the integrity
of the Supreme Court and American
institutions, this strategy doesn’t
work when the other side refuses to
reciprocate.
On election night in 2000, the
Wall Street Journal reported that
then-Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
“would be reluctant to retire if a
Democrat were in the White House
and would choose her replacement.”
O’Connor retired in 2005, with
former President George W. Bush
selecting her replacement. Former
Justice Anthony Kennedy chose to
retire in 2018 after Trump developed
a relationship with Kennedy to
ensure that he trusted Trump to
choose the right person to replace
him. Both O’Connor and Kennedy
are still alive today.
Liberal justices have illustrated
how retiring honorably, or on one’s
own terms, allows conservative
justices to remake the Supreme
Court. Ginsburg’s death last year, and
the aftermath illustrated the damage
these decisions can cause. In 1991,
former Justice Thurgood Marshall
chose to retire during the George
H.W. Bush administration for reasons
related to his health. Bush replaced
him with Justice Clarence Thomas,
who is still on the bench today and
is one of the most conservative
justices on the Supreme Court. It
is understandable why Marshall
retired when he did, and he certainly
deserved that retirement. But, it
is undeniable that his retirement
dramatically changed the makeup of
the Supreme Court for at least the past
30 years, and likely more.
While the Supreme Court should,
in theory, avoid party politics and
focus on delivering decisions that
follow the law and the Constitution,
it has become clear in recent years
that the Supreme Court, along with
the entire American judicial system,
has become much more politicized.
Ending the filibuster on all judicial
nominations and McConnell’s lack
of action to replace former Justice
Antonin Scalia in 2016 has made the
Supreme Court a political branch
of both parties. Breyer should
understand that his refusal to retire
is not a principled stance against the
polarization of this country. Rather, it
is an idealistic mistake that could give
conservatives an even stronger hold
on the Supreme Court, enabling the
Court to make decisions that harm
Americans.
The current Supreme Court
has already shown its ability to
make consequential decisions that
dramatically harm people’s lives. Its
lack of action on the Texas abortion
law illustrates why we need liberal
justices on the Supreme Court.
Besides this decision, the Supreme
Court’s upcoming term includes
cases that challenge Roe v. Wade,
gun laws and the role of religion in
schools. These are all issues that
could change American life, and
more significant decisions are sure to
be heard in the coming years.
The
Supreme
Court’s
6-3
conservative majority means that the
loss of another liberal justice would
lead to conservative domination for
years to come. The only way to ensure
that Breyer will be replaced by a
liberal justice is for him to step down
before the 2022 midterm elections
and allow Biden and the Democratic
Senate to choose his replacement.
R
iding the “Korean Wave,”
the survival, dystopian
K-drama “Squid Game”
has risen to No.1 on Netflix
in the United States. It’s no
surprise that this has happened.
Korean pop culture has not only
overtaken the US, but the globe.
The success of BTS and fervent
Twitter threads between K-Pop
stans evinces this. But there
is a deeper reason why “Squid
Game” has gained popularity
in such little time. Gen Z —
the generation born roughly
between 1996 and 2010 —
has an affinity for dystopian
fiction. This is the generation
that was raised on “The Hunger
Games,”
“Divergent”
and
“Maze Runner” in their tween
years.
Anti-utopian
fiction
is as integral as Disney in
Generation Z childhood media.
Unsurprisingly, a generation
raised
on
dystopianism
is
going to have fired-up political
motives. The United States has
become more like Panem, the
fictional nation at the center
of “The Hunger Games,” with
power and wealth ever more
consolidating in the hands of
the few. This has culminated in
a politically active, extremely
vocal generation. Being digital
natives has only propelled this
further. We, as Gen Z, need to
harness this political energy to
make impactful changes to our
politics at all levels.
The world in which Gen Z has
been thrust into is alarming.
The climate crisis is upon us
with its effects becoming more
apparent.
Temperatures
are
rising. Natural disasters are
becoming more extreme. Food
and water insecurity is and
will be dire. Socially, wealth
disparity is increasing. The
consolidation of wealth in the
US is returning to 1920s levels.
The richest Americans’ wealth
increased dramatically during
2020 while the rest of the
country faced a recession. Are
these descriptions of Panem or
of the United States? The line
is eerily blurred. The premises
of our childhood dystopian
fiction mirror the social strife
in the United States. We aren’t
an apocalyptic state yet, but
the signs don’t bode well for
the future. The inequalities in
the real world that formed the
basis of early 2010s dystopian
media have become exacerbated
and do not seem to be abating in
the near future unless systemic
change fueled by public outcry
takes place.
The teens and young adults
of the globe do not back down
in the political arena. The
political strategies employed
by this group resemble much
of the rebellious efforts of
our
dystopian
protagonists,
albeit less physically violent
in execution. Gen Z is highly
supportive of political protest
with a recent Politico poll
reporting
that
63%
of
the
generation supports protesting,
much of which is in regard to the
2020 protests in the name of the
Black Lives Matter movement.
What’s even more interesting
is that Gen Z views protesting
as more effective than voting to
influence politics. This portion
of the electorate is disenchanted
with the political status quo. The
protests against the military
coup in Myanmar saw protesters
use the iconic “Hunger Games”
three-finger salute. A related
political action that highlights
Gen Z’s digital aptitude was
when K-pop stans rallied online
to troll former President Donald
Trump by registering for his
rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma despite
never intending to attend. This
prompted Trump to tout his
popularity and then look quite
foolish. There is a global feeling
that the politics of the time are
veering toward crisis and people
are acting out in accordance.
Our generation has a certain
je ne sais quoi. We have a fire
under our asses lit by the
need to fix the socio-political
problems
that
are
pushing
our country to the precipice.
And it’s no shocker to me that
our political strategies show
continuity with those modeled
for us by the dystopian novels
and films of our youth. We
need to funnel this energy
into intense political activism.
Let us not be tempered in our
political
outrage.
We
have
mass communication platforms
at our disposal to unify and
mobilize. We are one of the
first generations to be able to
usurp traditional information
networks in order to make an
impact on politics. To bed with
only working within the system
to change the system. If there
is anything that our dystopian
media has taught us, it’s that
protest and working outside of
the system can be an impactful
form of political engagement.
Gen Z clings to themes of
dystopianism because we can
easily relate them to our own
experiences.
The
rich
are
getting richer at the expense
of the lower class. The climate
is being destroyed by the few
to the detriment of all. These
aren’t plot points in a fantasy
novel. As we start to burgeon
into the political scene, we
need to utilize this intense
zeal that we have to enact
social
change.
The
world
seems to be crumbling, but
we have the tools to fix it. I’m
glad to have been raised on
dystopianism. It’s imbued me
with a responsibility to engage
in political activism. I implore
that more of Gen Z leans into
this cultural current. It’s one of
our greatest strengths.
M
ark
Zuckerberg
wants
Facebook
to
become a “metaverse
company.” In August, Facebook
launched Horizon Workrooms,
an application where users can
strap on Facebook’s Oculus VR
headset and attend 3D virtual
meetings as their personalized
avatar. Although Zuckerberg’s first
foray into immersive tech might
be clunky right now, his belief in
the future of the metaverse is not
as far-fetched as it might sound.
Other Big Tech leaders such as
Epic Games’ Tim Sweeney and
Microsoft are talking about the
metaverse as a very real possibility
in the near future.
So, what is the metaverse?
Nobody knows exactly, but there
is a lengthy body of work on
the subject written by venture
capitalist Matthew Ball. For
those unwilling to dig through
Ball’s website, works of science-
fiction, like Ernest Cline’s “Ready
Player One” or the “San Junipero”
episode from Netflix’s Black
Mirror present captivating ideas
of how the metaverse might turn
out to mesh with our day-to-day
lives. Imagine finishing a meeting
on Workrooms at 3 p.m. on a
Wednesday and then instantly
transporting yourself to a virtual
shopping mall, where you spend
hours looking for a pair of cute
new bell-bottoms. The metaverse
is the overarching structure that
binds each space together into a
cohesive, navigable whole. It is no
surprise that Zuckerberg wants
an early stake in the metaverse.
The earlier Facebook can build
the most popular platform on
the metaverse, the more profit
they can rake in from advertisers.
If the amount of personal data
Facebook collects now is cause for
alarm, imagine the possibilities
for marketing firms once they
have access to every word we say,
every gesture we make and every
place we visit in the virtual world.
At this point, the metaverse
should sound like the worst
dystopia imaginable. In essence, it
is a digital universe designed and
controlled by Mark Zuckerberg,
in which advertisers can exploit
the field of neuroscience for even
greater profits than they already
are. Why are we not turning
our backs and running away
screaming?
We love social media, and at
the same time recognize how
detrimental it is to our mental
health. It seems impossible to
extricate ourselves from our
online social networks, from
fear of being left out and falling
behind. Once someone comes up
with a successful social platform
on the metaverse, a similar
network effect will occur, driving
greater numbers of people to
spend time on the newest fad
provided by the market.
Assuming,
then,
that
the
metaverse (with all its attendant
problems)
is
inevitable,
the
question becomes how should we
respond? Already, there are voices
in the tech industry thinking
of innovative ways to deal with
the potential ethical dilemmas
brought up in deciding how to
write algorithms. Should our
technology filter how we view the
real world? Will the metaverse
give
computer
engineers
an
unbearable burden of decision-
making? How will living in a
manufactured
world
impact
how we expose our children to
the world? It is good to know
that current professionals are
seriously considering the social
implications of their work, but it
is not enough.
Here at the University of
Michigan,
we
have
a
rich
tradition
of
excellence
in
technological innovation. Our
computer science, engineering
and various other technology-
oriented departments produce
successful,
industry-leading
graduates
that
go
on
to
accomplish great feats in their
respective careers. Larry Page
is perhaps the most notable
example, but he is certainly
not alone. Back in the 1980s,
U-M
Professor
Emeritus
Doug Van Houweling led a
project to rebuild a National
Science
Foundation
network
of
computers
that
arguably
invented the internet. We truly
are the Leaders and Best.
Now, if we are to live up to
our school’s reputation, then we
ought to direct our professional
efforts toward leading the path
forward
for
the
metaverse.
Computer
science
graduates
should think in great detail
about the impacts caused by the
code they write and advocate for
positive, helpful developments
in
our
technology.
Business
students should invest in and
found metaverse companies that
aim to improve the social welfare
of their consumers, even if that
cuts into their profits. Political
science students should advocate
for changes in government tech
policy that best reflect their
values and work towards the
future they wish to live in. We
have an opportunity to build
the metaverse into something
beautiful, and a responsibility
to make it as beneficial for the
public good as we can.
Opinion
BRITTANY BOWMAN
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.
CLAIRE HAO
Editor in Chief
ELIZABETH COOK
AND JOEL WEINER
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
Julian Barnard
Zack Blumberg
Brittany Bowman
Elizabeth Cook
Brandon Cowit
Jess D’Agostino
Andrew Gerace
Shubhum Giroti
Krystal Hur
Jessie Mitchell
Gabrijela Skoko
Evan Stern
Elayna Swift
Jack Tumpowsky
Joel Weiner
I
t all happened so quickly. Since
April 1, 2021, when I finally
committed to my university
of choice, every time I was asked
about my plans after high school, I
followed proudly with, “I’m going to
the University of Michigan.” Even
though I must have repeated that
response a million times, it doesn’t
feel real to be here in Ann Arbor. It
was more of an automatic reply, but
now I walk through the Law Quad,
the Diag and down Main Street and
it feels like I’ve been transported to a
new life. A common phrase circling
the internet (and campus) right now
among first-year students describes
the stunning realization “when you
commit to a top university and it’s
actually hard.” It is no longer just
a response or something to put in
your Instagram bio. It never felt
like the moment was ever going to
come. Time felt extended 100 times
due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We
anxiously sat and waited for over a
year for the change and excitement
that comes with being on campus.
Thinking forward to life in college
was a form of coping with social
isolation and depression.
The Wall Street Journal recently
ranked the University of Michigan
as the No. 1 public university in the
United States and No. 24 overall
among public and private universities.
According to the National Center
for Education Statistics, their most
recent data from 2018-2019 indicates
that there are 2,828 four-year colleges
in the U.S. 24th out of 2,828 is a mind-
boggling statistic to think about. This
data illustrates that you are the cream
of the crop as a student at U-M when
it comes to higher education.
The Wall Street Journal analyzes
and creates these rankings based
on several factors. While rankings
from different sources vary due to
utilizing different resources and
criteria, the Wall Street Journal
adequately analyzed and included
all the characteristics I investigated
while researching universities for my
college applications.
According to the Journal, “The
WSJ/THE rankings are based on 15
factors across four main categories:
Forty percent of each school’s overall
score comes from student outcomes,
including graduates’ salaries and
debt; 30% comes from academic
resources, including how much the
college spends on teaching; 20%
from student engagement, including
whether students feel prepared to use
their education in the real world, and
10% from the learning environment,
including the diversity of the student
body and academic staff.” While
the standards the University sets as
the top public school in the nation
are impressive, they can also create
an intimidating environment for
students.
As we power through midterm
season and calendars begin to fill
with club meetings, deadlines, office
hours and appointments, it is really
easy to feel overwhelmed as a student
at a university with such a rigorous
curriculum. One after the other,
new tasks pop up on the to-do list;
it’s like running on a hamster wheel.
Even though you feel you are pushing
yourself above and beyond, so is
everyone else. Every day I leave my
residence hall at 9 a.m. and return at 5
p.m., only to head out once again and
finally end my day after midnight.
Yet, it still never feels like enough.
Everyone around you appears to
be doing twice as much and having
twice as much fun during their free
time. Maybe prior to college, you may
have been the one who took the most
challenging
classes,
participated
actively in every club and held
a leadership position in every
organization. It never felt like an
option to be an average member. But
now, you are constantly surrounded
by students who are the exact same. It
is easy to feel the pressure to perform
at 100% all the time and live up to this
standard. Now, who rises to the top?
The Harvard Business Review
defines
imposter
syndrome
as “a collection of feelings of
inadequacy that persist despite
evident success.” The concept of
imposter syndrome is ingrained
in our brains at this University.
There are modules on Canvas
before arriving on campus, as well
as countless resources for support.
The University acknowledges how
mentally draining the environment
can become if you lack confidence
in your knowledge and ability. But
are they doing enough? Despite
their efforts, this feeling still stops
students from performing at their
best. 70% of people experience
imposter syndrome at some point
in their career. There is a constant
fear of failure as a student at
Michigan. According to an article
by our School of Public Health,
Michigan’s annual Healthy Minds
Study reported that “among the
respondents, 47% screened positive
for clinically significant symptoms
of depression and/or anxiety.”
In addition, many studies have
uncovered anxiety as a comorbid
condition with imposter syndrome
and that high school students who
experienced imposter syndrome
feelings “correlated significantly
with a history of prior suicidal
ideation
and
attempts
and
depression.”
The University needs to break the
silence and let its students know that
there is nothing wrong with feeling
inadequate. Feeling uncomfortable in
an unfamiliar situation is ultimately a
positive experience. It illustrates that
you are stepping out of your comfort
zone. Professors need to work to
promote a comfortable classroom
environment
that
facilitates
discussion and encourages getting
answers wrong to develop further
understanding of the material. By
bringing in successful alumni to
speak about their own struggles with
the fear of failure, it could help prove
that even those who look like they
have it all together, feel the same way.
As a community, we need to become
more transparent about how we
are doing. There is no need to hide
behind the perfect persona of the
perfect student. Based on the data,
we likely are all dealing with similar
issues, so we need to support one
another to not feel alone.
While being at this type of
university may be overwhelming
and
daunting
now,
graduating
with a degree from the No. 1 public
university will set you apart from
other applicants in the professional
world.
The
expansive
alumni
network connects you across the
globe. While the plethora of courses
and
organizations
may
seem
daunting now, these opportunities
are precisely what makes you thrive
post-graduation due to the abundance
of experience and knowledge gained.
No other university can replace
the spirit that booms through the
Big House on a fall Saturday or the
drive that exists in every student
here. Rather than doubting yourself
and letting the pressure sink in, take
full advantage of every opportunity
and every second at this amazing
university. Through the staff and
ambiance of this place, we have the
tools to thrive and become the best
version of ourselves. That is why the
Wall Street Journal ranked us as the
No. 1 public university.
How to live with imposter syndrome
You should be worried about the metaverse
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
6 — Wednesday, October 27, 2021
Retire, Justice Breyer
LYDIA STORELLA
Opinion Columnist
ALEX YEE
Opinion Columnist
Squid Game is just the latest in Gen
Z’s love of dystopian media
GABBY RIVAS
Opinion Columnist
BEN DAVIS
Opinion Columnist