The Change Democrats Could Need

Donald Trump’s win was an unexpected one. Political elite, media, and polls all suggested that Hillary Clinton would walk away with the Presidency. But despite any the shaky results the difference between the Electoral College and the popular vote might provide, Democrats cannot take a loss this big in stride. Major action and changes must be made in order to avoid such a devastating loss in the future, especially now that control of the Presidency, House, and Senate is in the Republicans hands.

Leadership in the House of Representatives might now seem like a big deal to most Americans. In fact, many of them can’t even name the Speaker of the House. But the leaders of each party in in our government help shape the party’s ideals, goals, and message. Currently, Congressman Nancy Pelosi serves as the House Minority Leader, and has been the leader of the House Democrats for 13 years. Despite that, she currently sits at an almost 50% disapproval rating. This should be a sign of the times for Democrats, that the politics of old, where those at the top stay in power until they decide to pass it on to a handpicked successor, are no longer going to fly.

Defying this status quo, Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan announced he will be aiming to take the leadership position from Pelosi. As Democrats watch Donald Trump to see if he will truly be a President “for all Americans”, they must also watch the leaders of their party to see if they make the changes necessary to prevent a future President Trump. As congressmen themselves are the ones who vote for their leaders, the age old tactic of calling your local congressman could be exactly what’s needed to make sure your representatives are doing their job to change with the times.

Climate Change: Another Puzzle with Missing Pieces

I was discussing snow with one of my friends recently – frustration with the current lack thereof, to be frank, since he was so kind as to start singing “Do You Want to Build a Snowman” at me – when the conversation took a serious turn towards global warming and our fears in terms of Trump’s plans regarding them. My friend was telling me about how ridiculous it was that people blatantly ignored the statistics regarding the rise in global temperatures, and even laughed about how stupid it was to deny that there was any change whatsoever.

So, maybe I misunderstood what climate-change-deniers believe. Or maybe he did. Or maybe we had both been ignoring that it isn’t a black-and-white topic?

I’ve been operating under the impression that the deniers understood that the temperatures have been rising drastically, but that their denial was of the theory that humans are causing it. After all, global temperatures have fluctuated before, so at least it makes mild sense that they would at least be accepting the data while drawing their own interpretations of it. Sure, “Overwhelming scientific consensus says human activity is primarily responsible for global climate change”, but there are also over a thousand scientists who disagree with that conclusion. It’s like the “vaccines cause autism” argument, in that people latch on to a few sources out of thousands to the contrary.

But there are actually people who ignore it altogether? That’s something I hadn’t witnessed.

Unfortunately, this lack of foresight on our parts is apparently more common than we’d realized. A few minutes of internet searching revealed forums we hadn’t discovered, stances we hadn’t considered, and we came to realize that both of us had been ignoring perfectly rational – even if occasionally flawed – beliefs held about this topic. And I do mean both of us; there are even arguments that my version of deniers held which I hadn’t considered.

All of this may seem like a long-winded and irrelevant anecdote, but the point here is that even when we think we know every counterargument, there could always be something that we’re missing. By dismissing what we know without digging to discover what we don’t, we effectively diminish our own ethos. The easiest way to find out what we’re missing from the puzzle is to sit down and ask, respectfully, rationally, and readily willing to listen and discuss.

Find out more about the opposing stances on climate change, and decide for yourself where you stand by checking out this website in depth.

Can Safety Pins Alleviate the 'All Lives Matter' Sentiment?

Hurray for safety pins. A way for the majority to put a foot forward and enter the conversation on discrimination. To signal a willingness to initiate dialogue instead of being a blank, white title page, contents unknown.

How does a white person start a conversation on discrimination while carefully treading on all the eggshells? There really should be a 'How to Talk about Racism for Dummies.'

Recently during the 2016 election, tensions over minority rights seem to have reached amazing new heights and don’t appear to be going away any time soon. 

The U.S. has already renewed conversations on police brutality and race after a number of shootings of black Americans and in part thanks to the efforts of the movement Black Lives Matter drawing attention to racial inequality. 

The words ‘Black Lives Matter’ make a strong statement as the title of a movement. It gets right to the point: black lives matter. However, the strong exclusivity and emphasis that makes ‘Black Lives Matter’ poignant, leaves a linguistic loophole forging the movement’s title into a double-edged sword in the ongoing battle against racism. 

 I’m talking about the ‘all lives matter’ comeback. 

‘All lives matter’ can be seen as a cheap, shallow concession or a negation of the power of the issue and the very real statistics behind it. But it may also point to the desire of some whites to lay down the seemingly hereditary blame that comes with carrying the gift of being born with a light skin tone.  

Guilt is not an emotion most people enjoy, and when coming face to face with the crisis of racial injustice in the U.S., there are white supporters of equality that struggle under its weight.

Granted, some people are just racist.

However, while attitudinal racism is a significant problem, white people cannot stop being white. And, I cringe as I write this, white people have troubles, too.

An interesting aspect of the current predicament is how to address attitudinal racism while laying the blame for it in the correct place - ignorance, unintended obliviousness, lack of experience. 

And by ‘lack of experience’ I mean that even as a white American who has lived in areas where pale skin is a minority trait, I will never understand what it means to go through life as a black American.

So, for those who truly feel ‘all lives matter,’ let’s wear some safety pins and engage in vergangenheitsbewältigung, people. 

The Germans created this lovely word post WWII and, roughly translated, it means ‘the process of coming to terms with the past.’ 

Perhaps a bit more elegant than the phrase ‘collective guilt’ sometimes used in English when referring to certain aspects of German cultural inheritance after the end of the Nazi regime.  

Vergangenheitsbewältigung is part of a German cultural acknowledgement of the past as an important lesson, but also the process of moving forward from those events while not forgetting them. 

Black Lives Matter is seeking reparations from the government and other institutions for years of unfulfilled promise and subpar treatment. 

But for the individual white American, what debt is owed our fellow black citizens? How do we compensate them for an advantage of birth that cannot be given away as easily as money? 

The potential answers to that question can be inspirational to crushingly overwhelming for a single person to contemplate on their own.

There are ‘majority’ Americans that already actively support minorities - with or without a safety pin. And there are allies taking part in the conversation on diversity and equality despite perhaps not fully understanding the stakes. Of what it means to not be white or Christian or straight. 

Hopefully, safety pin movement supporters will be able to keep the focus of the conversation where it rightfully belongs: on how to end discrimination. 

The Border

Immigration has made America into to the country it is today. The discovery of America was made by voyagers traveling from a different country, and they would be consider immigrants. Since then, America has grown larger and greater and it started with immigrants.

Republican Donald Trump, has very strong view against immigrants, especially against Muslims. His view is to block all Muslims from entering the country. In the article “Candidate dismisses criticism of his plan to keep Muslims out of U.S.,” It says “Trump's plan would block Muslim visitors and immigrants who want to move to the United States.” This is restricting only a certain group of people from coming to the “free land.” America is considered the free land because anyone is welcomed and they are granted freedom, as they become American citizens. But with Trump’s plan, he is being prejudice against Muslims. Because of terrorist attacks from ISIS and the events of 9/11, Trump has been influenced that all Muslims are bad. This however is not the case. If Trump’s ideas take action, innocent Muslims who are trying to find a better life in America will no longer have that opportunity. Just by past events, Trump will ruin lives of many Muslims who seek help. 

Just because he starts denying access to Muslims, doesn’t mean America is safe. There is more crimes than just terrorist attacks and one big point is all terrorist are not just Muslims. An person can be fit to terrorize, but Trump does not think about that. He is so narrow minded about the events from the past that he doesn’t think about other possibilities. For example, how about all these police officers who have murdered innocent people. These officers are not all Muslim, but still terrorize the community. A lot of people do not trust these officers anymore, but Trump doesn’t see them as a threat.    

Show Support to Really Give Thanks

Memories of learning about Thanksgiving in elementary school conjure up thoughts of the feathered headdresses and pilgrim hats which we were taught to make – cringe-worthy in hindsight, cute in concept. My elementary school, like many others, was quick to emphasize the theme of friendship between Native Americans and the European immigrants. “It was so nice of them to teach our ancestors how to farm, wasn’t it, kids? If it wasn’t for the kindness of Native Americans, we wouldn’t even be here!”

It wasn’t until late middle school that we found out that the Europeans didn’t stay that friendly for very long. It wasn’t until high school that we started learning about the multitude of atrocities committed against the same people who, every November, we celebrated our ancestors being saved by.

What a twist, right?

People have been arguing about the celebration of Thanksgiving for years, whether they believe it is a reminder of the genocide of Native Americans, or they think it is a celebration of European survival in America. The thing is, since as it stands the holiday is largely still taught to be a friendly event, it seems especially ironic to be celebrating it this year.

Especially since, you know, people are still trying to construct a pipeline that would endanger the water supply for millions of Native Americans while desecrating sites they hold sacred. It wasn’t bad enough that Europeans went and killed countless indigenous people, or forcibly relocated and confined them to increasingly smaller areas or land, or even that they took children from their Native American families and forced them into boarding schools in an attempt to “civilize” them. No, their descendants still feel the need to frame this holiday as innocent and pleasant even while still currently endangering the lives of the other side’s descendants.

I get it. No one wants to teach their kids about genocide. And I get it, it’s really easy to sit down with family and eat yourself into a food coma when you aren’t affected by the violence that’s been perpetrated against Native Americans since that fateful first Thanksgiving. But why completely block out the rest of the narrative to focus on that one moment of calm? Why pretend you’re thankful for what they did, when the day is going to be spent watching parades and football while eating as much food as you can find? Don’t Americans have enough holidays to spend time with family?

If you’re really thankful for the events that brought you to where you are today – for the events that led to America being colonized – consider donating or sending supplies to the Camp of the Sacred Stones and the Red Warrior Camp, as the Standing Rock Sioux, other indigenous Americans, and their allies fight to defend what’s left of their land from the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. 

Troubling News, Trump Continues to Ditch Press

President-elect Donald Trump ditched his press pool again Nov. 15 to go out to dinner without the media.

The presidential press pool, a group of designated journalists that follow the president and pass current information on his doings to the rest of the media, is a long standing tradition Trump seems intent on avoiding.

While it’s understandable he might want a nice quiet dinner, Trump has long been a public figure. With his recent election victory, being a constant focus of the media is no longer simply a matter of privacy – it is now about transparency as well. 

While his spokeswoman Hope Hicks has said Trump will be cooperating with a pool, his recent actions suggest that cooperation will be begrudgingly given.

Throughout his campaign, Trump harassed and maligned reporters that presented him negatively (e.g. Megyn Kelly) and barred some from covering his campaign events. 

In a troubling continuance of his hostility to the press, directly after his election Trump refused journalists access to his first meeting with President Obama.

The media creates an unofficial record of events – some news articles are considered admissible in court. By not allowing journalists to follow him, Trump is both obscuring important historical moments for future generations and delaying giving the present public knowledge of his presidential agenda. An agenda many would very much like the details on. 

Members of the White House Correspondent Association have also expressed concern about keeping the public in the loop in the event of a national crisis, including threats to the president’s life.

“A pool of reporters and photographers was in the motorcade when President John F. Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas,” said a Nov. 10 article by the Associated Press.

Even before his election and recent decisions to exclude journalists from his entourage, both conservative and liberal reporters had misgivings about Trump’s attitude towards the media. 

The very first constitutional amendment covers freedom of religion, expression, assembly and the right to petition. There is a long tradition of free speech, press and the ability to have differing opinions in the U.S.

Trump’s statements about race, immigration and Islam may concern liberals. His dismissal of the press, however, should concern all regardless of political leanings. Limiting a free press sets a dangerous precedent to limiting government transparency with the public or, worse, the freedom of expression many of us treasure.

Change is Needed

The topic of Gun control is highly controversial for multiple reasons. Of course it deals with American rights but it is also a moral fight.  I personal have a rather simple view on gun control. I think in the world we live in you need to own a gun and or should have access to one. You should be able to protect yourself now let me be clear what I don’t think is a good idea, is allowing someone to walk into a store and buy 300 hundred rounds and 2 assault rifles. I think most of the laws we have right now are good but when I say some things need to be stricter it’s the fact that you don’t need an assault rifle to protect yourself.

When it comes to guns most people when asked “Could you get a gun if you needed to” would generally respond with yes.  Although vague most people believe they could get a gun if push came to shove. Most arguments that suggest gun laws need to be stricter have pointed to many cases of mass murder due to the easy access of to guns. With the emergence of these "mass murders" America voted and in the United States 55 percent of Americans favor stricter gun control legislation. Just recently when I went to Wal-Mart for the first time I realize that they sell gun ammunition. Although they don’t have guns its speaks values about how our society is structured that right next to the children’s toys 3 aisles down you can get bullets. 

I think when people argue for more less gun control its because they fear that they wont want to protect themselves and in turn think it is unconstitutional. Overall I think gun laws currently only need to be modified so that nothing more than a simple hand gun is allowed on the streets.