XXXIII - 7 -The Cornell Review

The Cornell Review "We Do Not Apologize."

An Independent Publication Vol. xxxiii, no. vii Pg. 2

Jake Zhu ‘18 challenges the notion that a college degree is required of a presidential candidate.

blog.thecornellreview.com

BLOG

The Conservative Voice on Campus March 16, 2015

thecornellreview.com

SITE

Pg. 10

Pg. 4

Matthew Lin ‘16 weighs in on the pros and cons of recently-announced net neutrality regulations.

Benjamin Rutkovsky ‘17 argues against Wesleyan’s forced coeducation of oncampus fraternities.

Cornell #2 on List of Most Anti-Semitic Campuses Laura Gundersen Managing Editor

C

Casey Breznick/The Cornell Review

ornell, despite the fact that one fifth of its students are Jewish, has earned second place on the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s list of the ten most anti-Semitic college campuses of 2014, only second to Columbia.

A new wing of the Horowitz Center, called “Jew Hatred on Campuses,” compiled the list.

Founder David Horowitz stated, “We made the decision to form ‘Jew Hatred on Campus’ to expose anti-Semitic student groups who support or are associated with known terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah, and which call for the destruction of the Jewish State.”

After Cornell and Columbia, the most anti-Semitic campuses include George Mason University, Loyola University

Chicago, Portland State University, San Diego State University, San Francisco State University, Temple University, University of California Los Angeles, and Vassar College.

Most of the reasoning for Cornell’s placement on the list involves the actions of the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) faction on campus.

SJP has consistently organized See Cornell Certainly on page 8

ILR School Honors Bill Nye ‘77 the Politically Communist Union Leader Harry Bridges Correct Guy on ISIS, Israel Alexis Cashman Staff Writer

Christopher Nowacki Staff writer

H

A

orders, and a tentative contract had finally been drawn up by the end of February. ow often does current At the same time that the news correspond with union’s actions unnecessarily standard history courses? Not stifled the US economy, Cortoo often. But this February, nell’s ILR department honcommunist-affiliated Harry ored the union’s founder with Bridge’s labor union, the In- a showing of the Harry Bridgternational Longshore and es Project, a biopic in the form Warehouse Union (ILWU), of a one-many play featuring tied up California ports just actor Ian Ruskin. During the as Cornell’s School of In- play, Ruskin, speaking as the dustrial and Labor Relations deceased Bridges, stated that (ILR) honored the Australian Harry Bridge’s immigrant armemory. rived in the US The ILWU, with a “head along most full of Jack of the West London and Coast, forced a Karl Marx.”

9-month conAs a child, he tract negotiacollected rent tion charactermoney for his ized by severe Image via The Harry Bridges Project father, who s l o w - d o w n s Ian Ruskin, author of and was a landlord, and port con- sole performer in The Harry and would acBridges Project gestion. With tually pay for the ports shut those renters down, the American econo- who could not afford it. After my lost roughly $2 billion per coming to America, Bridges day, as 70% of Asian-American joined the IWW, the Internatrade flows in through these tional Workers of the World, western ports. According to until the government cracked Reuters, shipping companies, down and decimated the comretailers, and other major munist union in the 1920s. businesses suffocated as a When Bridges worked on chink in their supply chains the waterfront in San Franwas squeezed by the union. cisco, he helped to start the Agriculture was hit particu- “Waterfront Workup,” a newslarly hard, as perishables on paper for longshoremen, by board those ships could last longshoremen. It was his way for only so long. Labor Sec- of sticking the middle finger to retary Thomas Perez even- “newspapers [who] [were] on tually traveled to California the side of the greedy at the to attempt to settle the disSee Harry Bridges on page 5 pute under President Obama’s

t Cornell there are a handful of things we cherish: breaks, hockey, campus-progressivism, and Bill Nye ‘77. In fact, Cornellians love their “science guy” alum so much that “taking a selfie with Bill Nye” on campus is on the iconic list of “161 thing(s) to do” as a student at Cornell.

Many of us can still nostalgically recall the myriad educational videos from elementary and middle school of the quirky, tall man in the white lab coat and bow tie known as Bill Nye “the Science Guy.” He was the man we went to learn about electricity, biology, astronomy, foreign policy, and political ideology.

Wait, what were those last two? Because, for some reason,

Image via Mashable

NYE’S NEUROSIS: Bill Nye ‘77, a much-loved and famous alumnus, has unfortunately succumbed to the twin neuroses of political correctness and liberalism. “I think you get to know your neighbors,” he said in regards to European Jews seeking asylum in Israel.

I’m having trouble conjuring up memories of Bill Nye weighing in as a political pundit all those years ago. And hey, shouldn’t a guy who works with small children stick to the educational stuff and leave religion and politics out of it?

Student Assembly Presidential Election Interviews Pg. 9

Shay Collins ‘18 asks the questions Cornell Speech and Debate Union moderators won’t dare to.

These questions are probably floating through the heads of much of the media (and followers) in the wake of an episode of Real Time with Bill Maher that aired on Feb. 20.

Maher ’78, a long-time talk show host, commentator, and See Double Trouble on page 2

ana Juli ta s Bati

ey Jeffr er Breu

Vote!

thew Mat nko a Stef

2

Liberal Logic: College Degree Double Trouble: Required to Become President Nye ‘77 on Maher ‘78 Mainstream media slams degree-less Gov. Scott Walker Jake Zhu National News Editor

H

e was elected into the Wisconsin State Assembly at the young age of 25, later became the Executive of Milwaukee County who turned the deficit into a surplus, and is now Governor of Wisconsin who has created 100,000 jobs in his first term alone. Can any reasonable American citizen honestly argue that these accomplishments in public service do not characterize someone who is worthy of serving as the next President of the United States?

It is no mystery that Americans have a penchant for electing individuals who have college degrees as the President. In fact, the past three Presidents all have, at the very least, a Master’s Degree. However, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, one of many Republicans who has his eyes set on the Oval Office, does not have a college degree like his competitors. Liberals across the country, in their attempt to discredit him as a serious presidential contender, are forcing him to address this non-issue as something that can make or break his candidacy.

Although liberals would certainly like people to believe otherwise, it is essential to understand that this left-wing attack on Scott Walker’s lack of college degree stems not from a concern for the nation’s future but from a form of elitism that plagues a large number of Democratic voters.

Many prominent Democratic donors, such as George Soros and Peter Lewis, claim to uphold the rights of the urban working class, though they themselves come from affluence and are out of touch with the authentic needs of the people outside of their narrowly-defined political realm. Liberal elitism is therefore hypocritical because although liberals portray themselves as “champions of the working poor and common man,” they do not tolerate “normal people” who do not match their prestigious Ivy League education, especially if those people threaten the current elite socio-political hierarchy by acquiring political office.

Furthermore, liberals often complain that politicians do not mimic the general populace.

They contend that the makeup of Congress and elected officials in general fail to represent the entirety of the American people, so the U.S. government is therefore undemocratic.

However, these same critics demonstrate hypocrisy when they question the academic qualifications of Scott Walker. They forget that most Americans have not completed college. In fact, the Census Bureau’s data states that only approximately 32% of adults aged 25 and older have a college degree. In this case, if liberal logic is

consistently applied instead of discarded whenever inconveniences arise, then doesn’t electing Scott Walker as President put the country one step closer to an “actual democracy?”

It is certainly ironic that the same people who criticized Mitt Romney and the Bush family for their excessive wealth and elite backgrounds are now attacking Walker for his regular, normal guy persona. Clearly, these slanderers are not actually concerned about college attendance, but simply intent on vilifying a Governor who is better at running something other than his mouth.

As for the liberal elites who do indeed unequivocally advocate for a higher education requirement for the political office, their exclusionary proposal has troubling social implications for the American people. Since a college education is not very accessible for those who are poor, urban, or of a racial minority group, they may face educational discrimination. Although the Georgetown Public Policy Institute predicts that by 2020, 65% of jobs will require a college degree, there is a lack of credible evidence that having a college degree causes an improved job performance. With no evidence of any real benefit of having a college degree, that means many employers are unfairly barring the common people from the workface and, consequently, an opportunity to rise up the social ladder.

“Once a person has reached a certain destination, whether a college degree was included in his or her path to that destination is irrelevant,” asserts Matt Hagerty ’18. “Are the accomplishments and intellects of Abraham Lincoln and Bill Gates less legitimate because neither happened to have college degrees?”

Although liberals see Obama’s presidential victory as breaking the racial barrier and Hillary Clinton’s candidacy as shattering the gender barrier, they fail to understand Scott Walker’s candidacy as a historic deconstruction of the formal education barrier. There is no doubt that college is certainly a pathway through which individuals can learn, grow, and prosper to become the future leaders of this nation. However, college is by far not the only pathway to success. It is crucial that the American people understand that someone who doesn’t have his or her name in a fancy font on expensive paper is just as capable of achieving success as a graduate of the elite Ivy League, so that we can finally put an end to the educational discrimination that Scott Walker and many others face in contemporary society.

Jake Zhu is a freshman in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at jjz43@cornell.edu.

You Decide Without a college degree, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has managed to...

Meanwhile, as Secretary of State, Yale Law graduate Hillary Clinton managed to...

- Turn a $3.6 billion state deficit into a $911 million surplus without raising taxes

- Travel 956,733 miles--enough to span the Earth 38 times--making her the most traveled Secretary of State

- Oversee an economic turnaround where state per capita income has risen from $38,755 to $43,149

- Visit a record 112 countries, but failed to improve diplomatic relations with a single one

- Oversee an economy that has produced a net gain of over 100,000 private sector jobs

- “Reset” relations with a belligerent, militaristic Russia that went on to annex the Crimea and invade Ukraine

- Win three state-wide elections in a purple state in four years (he faced a re-call election in 2011)

- Oversee the deaths of four Americans at Benghazi, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens

Continued from front page regular lunatic, had fellow Bill/alum on the show this past month during which a panel discussed the state of terror and anti-Semitism in much of Western and Central Europe.

“I think you get to know your neighbors,” answered Nye, with regards to Jews in Europe seeking asylum in Israel. This all comes in the wake of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s request of his European Jewish contemporaries to migrate to Israel and escape the terrors of Islamic Extremism and overall anti-Semitism in Europe today.

So I guess that’s it then kids: Bill Nye the politically correct guy has asserted his hypothesis that the key to peace in the West is to just “get to know your neighbors.” Perhaps he should test this one. Much like he does on children’s programs with baking soda-powered volcanoes, and balls of electricity that make one’s hair stand on end. Because, according to a recent statement to Congress regarding terrorism delivered

by Prime Minister Netanyahu, I might draw a dissenting conclusion.

According to National Intelligence Director James Clapper, 2014 was the “most lethal year for global terrorism in the 45 years (since) such data has been compiled.” Therefore, it is only logical to assume that terrorism certainly hasn’t been decreasing over time (at least within recent years).

Could this increase in terror possibly be due to increased antagonism on the parts of Jews in Europe (and all of the other groups matched against radical Islam)? After all, the love-thy-neighbor romantic view championed by Nye and company implies a degree of pre-existing mutual antagonism amongst parties—Islamic and Jewish in this case.

In fact, maybe it’s the European/Western Jewish community that is the real problem after all. Because, as the progressive left assures, terror is not a product of Islam. And lest we not forget the plethora of terror organizations led in the name of other faiths.

State Department Spokeswoman, Marie Harf, continued her media tear on terror earlier this month on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, and later Morning Joe

with Joe Scarborough uttering the words Nye had insinuated. She mentioned that before we are quick to label terror organizations as Islamic, we can’t forget the prominent non-Muslim ones such as “the Lord’s Resistance Army” led by Joseph Kony.

Throw in some data on how many Palestinian children have been “murdered” in Israeli air strikes within the past year, and suddenly the milquetoast rhetoric of Nye and Harf look somewhat pragmatic— even plausible.

Laughable yet daunting, in this progressive spin lies much danger. Lefties like Nye aren’t just reticent to call out the true enemy, radical Islam, for reasons of not appearing bigoted. It is deeper than that. The political correctness stance on the Israel-Islam question is so too the one of our county’s leaders. Last time I checked, our President has still yet to refer to terror as “Islamic Extremism.” Therefore the capitulatory deference to radical Islam is quite arguably the opinion of the State itself.

And why wouldn’t big government supporters like Nye and Harf go right along with that perspective?

A state deferential to the persecution of certain ethnic groups at the expense of not being alienated for questioning such norm?

Has a certain Nazism vibe to it.

And amazingly, the only stat against the efficacy of the “getting to know one’s neighbor” policy in that whole fiasco was a mere 12 million innocent lives.

How many heads must be severed – how many quarts of infidel blood drained into the sea – until the talking heads can cut the rhetoric?

Luckily for Bill Nye, when “his neighbors” who just joined ISIS come to slaughter him too, the fact that his signature bow ties seem to cut off much circulation to his brain means the execution won’t be so wet and messy.

Christopher Nowacki is a sophomore in the College of Human Ecology. He can be reached at cmn63@cornell. edu.

For daily coverage of and commentary on campus and national news, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter @ thecornellreview.

It’s the right thing to do.

3

Should Local Businesses and C.U. ‘Ban the Box’?

Ithacans debate whether employers should be required to ask potential employees about criminal pasts Shay Collins Campus News Editor

D

oes Cornell employ former convicts and felons? Cornell administrators routinely emphasize that the University is the largest employer in Tompkins County. As such, Cornell’s decision to hire, or not hire, former convicts will greatly impact their rate of employment in the local community.

Ithaca’s Mayor Svante Myrick ‘09 stated that the city could not “ban the box” on job applications that notes if an applicant has been convicted of a crime at a Feb. 16 panel discussion at the Cinemapolis, according to an Ithaca Journal article.

“As an employer, the city must screen for people with addictions if they’re going to be driving or working with youth,” Myrick explained. He went on to say the local government could suggest such a change to employers.

A discussion of hiring practices in Tompkins County would be insufficient without considering Cornell’s practices.

A representative from Cornell’s Recruitment and Employment Center has yet to respond to an inquiry about whether Cornell currently recruits or hires former convicts.

Meanwhile, Cornell’s Prison Reform and Education Project (PREP) club commenced planning a “ban the box” campaign, according to PREP’s co-president and co-founder Garrison Lovely ’16., “One of the biggest contributing factor to high recidivism amongst formerly incarcerated people in the US is lack of professional and academic opportunities following a prison sentence,” Lovely said.

Cornell’s large number of employees (8,103 full- and part-time staff and 1,628 faculty members as of Fall 2013) grants

Map from West Virginia Center on Budget & Policy

‘Ban the Box’ Map

States shaded in dark grey have banned the box. States shaded in light grey have localities that have banned the box. it certain advantages when hiring former convicts. The University employs many workers in introductory-level positions-- jobs that people who missed work or educational experience while in prison may transition into more easily. Furthermore, Cornell could more easily withstand turnover from former convicts who are still recovering from addiction or for other reasons may not last as long without quitting.

However, I by no means propose that Cornell hire former convicts out of a “charity case” mentality. Rather, an increase in employment of former convicts would likely lead to a decrease in crime and addiction rates in Tompkins County. Cornell simply possesses the greatest demand for positions that former convicts could fill.

Yet, proposing that Cornell endeavor to hire more former convicts does not necessarily imply that Cornell or other employers should “ban the box.” Applicants would still likely disclose previous convictions to explain gaps in their

The Cornell Review Founded 1984 -> Incorporated 1986

Casey Breznick Editor-in-Chief

Laura Gundersen Managing Editor

Shay Collins

Campus News Editor

Jake Zhu

National News Editor

Staff Writers Alexis Cashman Miranda Hawkins Christopher Nowacki John Pedro Austen Rattray Abhinav Saikia Andres Sellitto

Contributors Steven Lai, art Matthew Lin, editorial David Ticzon, photography

Mark LaPointe President

Benjamin Rutkovsky Treasurer

Faculty Advisor William A. Jacobson

Board of Directors Christopher DeCenzo Joseph E. Gehring Jr. Anthony Santelli Jr.

The Cornell Review is an independent biweekly journal published by students of Cornell University for the benefit of students, faculty, administrators, and alumni of the Cornell community. The Cornell Review is a thoughtful review of campus and national politics from a broad conservative perspective.

The Cornell Review, an independent student organization located at Cornell University, produced and is responsible for the content of this publication. This publication was not reviewed or approved by, nor does it necessarily express or reflect the policies or opinions of, Cornell University or its designated representatives.

The Cornell Review is published by The Ithaca Review, Inc., a non-profit corporation.

The opinions stated in The Cornell Review are those of the individual author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors or the staff of The Cornell Review. Editorial opinions are those of the responsible editor.

The opinions herein are not necessarily those of the board of directors, officers, or staff of The Ithaca Review, Inc. The Cornell Review is distributed free, limited to one issue per person, on campus as well as to local businesses in Ithaca. Additional copies beyond the first free issue are available for $1.00 each. The Cornell Review is a member of the Collegiate Network.

The Cornell Review prides itself on letting its writers speak for themselves, and on open discourse. We publish a spectrum of beliefs, and readers should be aware that pieces represent the views of their authors, and not necessarily those of the entire staff.

If you have a well-reasoned conservative opinion piece, we hope you will send it to cornellreview@cornell.edu for consideration.

Copyright © 2015 The Ithaca Review Inc. All Rights Reserved.

work experience that occurred while serving a prison sentence.

Andrew Taylor, the Substance Use Outreach Specialist at the Southern Tier AIDS Program, also partook in the Feb. 16 panel and argued that, even without a box on job applications, employers would still learn which employees had prior convictions. “[B]ackground checks are becoming pretty standard these days, so it’s not really ‘if’ an employer will know about a felony but ‘when,’” Taylor explained in a statement to The Cornell Review.

What, then, can cause employers to hire more former convicts? According to Taylor, only positive experiences with former convict employees.

“If employers who have hired recovering addicts report to other employers positive experiences, then the box will not get in anyone’s way,” Taylor stated.

Taylor expresses a strongly pro-personal responsibility sentiment: former convicts will more likely gain employment through demonstrated

reformation, reliability and work ethic than through information being withheld from employers.

Lovely also commented that keeping the “box” on the application “essentially punishes people twice for the same crime.” While I logically agree with Lovely’s argument, it is also important to note that most former convicts also currently do not measure up to other applicants in terms of previous work experience, a relevant factor that can be explained through the “box.”

Truthfully, I am arguing for an affirmative action-like hiring and recruitment program at Cornell. However, I strongly believe the positive economic and social benefits effected by increased former convict employment in Tompkins County—namely lower crime and addiction rates – would justify the implementation of such a program. Obviously, Cornell’s hiring decisions will have to be coupled with counseling and support services, but programs in Tompkins County already exist to serve this purpose.

How much would hiring, or hiring a larger number of, former convicts affect the average Cornell student’s dayto-day experience? Probably not at all, which furthers my argument that Cornell should consciously recruit and hire them. As Taylor states: “In the end people’s work has to speak for itself, and finding good employees is harder than asking certain questions about background history on an application.”

The ball is in the Cornell administration’s court: let’s see how greatly they value town-gown relations and truly seek to better the Ithaca community.

Shay Collins is a freshman in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at smc377@cornell.edu.

Did you know that 45% of the cost of beer is taxes?

Outrageous, right?

If you think so you will be in good company at The Cornell Review.

Send us an email at cornellreview@cornell.edu.

Join us on Tuesdays at 5pm in 158 Goldwin Smith Hall.

4

From Sea to Shining Sea: Campus Leftism Just a snippet of the selection of stories we could have written about...

Boston University offers Harry Potterthemed sex-ed classes as part of ‘Frisky February’

All-women Scripps College lets students choose among 10 different gender types

George Washington University conservative group labeled ‘cancer,’ ‘hate group’ for opting out of LGBT training

UCLA Student Council grills Jewish student’s appointment to judicial committee because of her faith

Keep the Frat in Fraternity A Wesleyan University fraternity is suing the school over a policy requiring on-campus fraternities to admit women Benjamin Rutkovsky Treasurer

F

ive months ago Wesleyan University administrators handed down an ultimatum to its on-campus social fraternities: admit women or be shut down. Despite the fact that the policy was ostensibly meant to foster greater equality, in late February, one of the two on-campus fraternities, Delta Kappa Epsilon, sued the university claiming the policy is in fact discriminatory.

Wesleyan’s forced coeducation of fraternities is an attempt to both increase gender equality and decrease sexual assault

and identities” and this opportunity includes single-sex housing too.

Home to two of the travesties mentioned--the student falling out a window and one of the sexual assaults mentioned-the so-called “rape factory” of Beta Theta Pi at Wesleyan is an off-campus fraternity, and therefore not recognized officially by the university. Yet, the school has banned all of its students from entering the fraternity’s house.

Psi Upsilon and Delta Kappa Epsilon are the two fraternities officially recognized by Wesleyan. Psi Upsilon has been placed on a social ban because

think the attempted coeducation of fraternities is a way to try to combat the culture of sexual assault on college campuses, but I definitely don’t think it’s an end-all solution.”

He went on to say he would rather place emphasis on educating students about sexual assault rather than making drastic changes to the current fraternal organizations.

Another issue gender integration within fraternities will bring about is the fact that male students will still seek an allmale brotherhood. This will lead to more joining the unregulated Beta Theta Pi or will give rise to other fraternities or

“I think the attempted coeducation of fraternities is a way to try to combat the culture of sexual assault on college campuses, but I definitely don’t think it’s an end-all solution.” - Daniel Giovanniello, Wesleyan ‘17 within fraternities. Specifically, t this initial order from Wesleyan’s president and chairman of its board of trustees came in response to two sexual assault reports at fraternity houses and after a student plummeted to his death off the third floor of a fraternity house. Though Wesleyan is considered one of the most liberal colleges in the country, this policy, which rewrites the very definition of a social fraternity in the faux name of equality and political correctness, is nothing less than draconian.

Delta Kappa Epsilon’s lawsuit argues that Wesleyan’s targeting of Greek organizations and their living arrangement policies is discriminatory and unfair. The lawsuit points out a number of different special-interest residencies on campus, including ethnic-based and religious-based residences.

The lawsuit contends Wesleyan “gives students the opportunity to live collectively in a house or hall, fraternity or society, based on shared hobbies, experiences, cultural interests

of an ongoing sexual assault investigation.

As a member of a fraternity on the Cornell campus, I believe a coed fraternity would not allow me to attain the same level of brotherhood as my current, single-sex fraternity.

Elimination of the single-sex fraternity system would greatly decrease the benefits of joining a fraternity.

I also argue that the gender integration of fraternities would not change the attitudes of those fraternity members and non-Greek party-goers who are inclined to engage in illicit, condemnable sexual behavior. There is no reason to believe a constant female presence in fraternity homes would change the behavior and actions of the worst of the worst males.

Furthermore, sexual assaults could begin within the brotherhood as women join, and can still occur at parties hosted by the fraternity.

Daniel Giovanniello, a sophomore at Wesleyan, expressed his thoughts on the matter: “I

Kalamazoo College student government calls campus carry advocate ‘racist’ and ‘homophobic’

all male organizations beyond the jurisdiction of Wesleyan.

As is usually the case with dogood policies handed down by far-removed administrators and bureaucrats, this policy will only increase the prevalence of bad behavior it seeks to wipe out.

Psi Upsilon Executive Director Thomas Fox said in a statement, “I would think that it would be seen as a benefit to a college campus to have multiple options for students to join, both single-sex and coed.”

In my opinion, it is better to keep these fraternities single-sex and try to regulate them, than to integrate them and give rise to a “black market” so to speak for underground or off campus all male societies.

Benjamin Rutkovsky is a sophomore in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.

He can be reached at bmr88@ cornell.edu.

U-Minnesota Drops Race Identifiers in Police Alerts

Andres Sellitto Staff Writer

R

acism, as we all know, is merely a product of the cisheteropatriarchy that we call the United States-- you know, that fascist police state. Nevertheless, my dear flower people, do not despair, for the resistance is here, and its name is the University of Minnesota (UM).

You would not think people in the polite and calm Midwest would behave this way, but recent events have shown otherwise.

After Beth Lueck, surprisingly still a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, offered academic credit to students who protested Scott Walker, it is now the turn for the alma mater of the Land of 10,000 Lakes to strike one more blow for the Politically Correct Police (PCP).

The college has been in the national spotlight recently for various race-related news. As it appears, both students and administration are very, very sensitive when it comes to offending anyone that might identify with a minority on campus. A very concerning change in policy regarding the crime alerts on campus eliminated race from a suspect’s profile description when being searched. In fact, Pamela Wheelock, the school’s vice president, told the Minneapolis Star Tribune that the suspect’s description will only be provided in cases with “sufficient detail that would help identify a specific individual or group.”

“[The new policy] sets an unfortunate precedent in regards to the administration caving into the ‘politically correct’ demands of leftist groups who hold protests in violation of existing laws.” - Anders Koskinen, UM ‘17 Imagine those police descriptions: “be on the lookout for a 6’ tall...human?”

Obviously, what neither Wheelock nor any other college authority mentioned how police are going to able to find suspects now after this policy has been enacted. Seems like exchanging physical for psychological safety is a fair trade-off nowadays. In a letter to faculty, staff and students, UM President Eric Kaler said the routine use of a person’s race in those descriptions “may unintentionally reinforce stereotypes of black men and other people of color, as criminals and threats.” Of course, describing the physical looks of a person is inherently racist to the black community. I do not really know why a measure that in theory applies to everyone should be only racist to the black community, but we will leave that to Mr. Kaler’s good judgment.

“The University has a duty to provide as much information as possible about crimes that occur on or near campus. Purposely leaving out relevant identifiers, especially critical ones such as race, is detrimental to the safety of students on campus,” said Anders Koskinen, a sophomore at UM. When asked about feeling targeted by police descriptions or offended by police action on campus, Victor Yoma ‘18, a Venezuelan student in the neighboring University of St. Thomas, stated, “I

See Political Correctness on page 9

5

US Flag Temporarily Banned from UC Irvine ‘Inclusive Space’ Casey Breznick Editor-in-Chief

I

wish they all could be California, I wish they all could be California, I wish they all could be California... Liberals.

Why? The Golden State seems to always produce some of the looniest of liberals, and the University of California (UC) public school system in particular is a gold mine of stories about campus leftism run amok.

Consider: in early March members of UC Irvine’s student-government Legislative Council passed a bill banning the hanging of all nations’ flags in the lobby of the student government offices. The bill identified the sacred lobby as an “inclusive space” and deemed all flags forms of “hate speech.” It was Old Glory, though, that carried the most baggage: UC Irvine’s elected student representatives think it represents exceptionalism, superiority, and oppression.

Well, yes to the first two. That’s why we wave it. If it represented mediocrity--like, say, the flag of the European Union-would anyone want to display it? As for oppression, it only figures college leftists would call oppressors the flag and country that liberated more people than any other in all of history. After all, liberation is oppression, right Big Brother?

A few days after this bill passed, the school’s student government vetoed the measure. Undoubtedly, UC Irvine woke up and realized there’s a whole country surrounding it that doesn’t think the American flag is offensive.

If I ever visit, I hope to see the star spangled banner yet wave o’er the leftists of UC Irvine.

Harry Bridges Play Continued from front page expense of the needy… like Hearst.”

The longshoremen’s propaganda helped unify longshoremen to form the modern ILWU, one of the strongest and most militant unions of the time up through now. This propaganda included messages like: “It’s always a class struggle. Workers have to stick together,” and “We will stay out on strike until these damn ship owners come to their senses.”

Eventually, the ILWU was formed in 1937. When asked if there were communists in this new union, Bridges alleged response was: “Oh yeah. I would have worked with the devil himself. Communists make good members… our union was pretty radical.” After winning a major labor agreement, Bridges stated: “[Union members] went on strike as wharf rats, but [they] came back Lords of the Docks.”

This raises some serious questions about who should be running a business: unskilled labor, or high-profile business managers with a much better understanding of the business operation? In this case, the ILWU wanted as much power as they could grab. While there should not necessarily be lowly “wharf rats” versus “lords,” there must be a middle

ground; and the idea that unskilled labor could respectably call themselves Lords of the Docks is a bit disconcerting.

These newly established Lords of the Docks wrote up the Constitution of the ILWU. The Preamble states: “We list common objectives to advance the living standards of ourselves and of our fellow workers everywhere in the world; to promote the general welfare of our nation and our communities; to banish racial prejudice and discrimination; to strengthen democracy everywhere; and achieve enough peace in the world to form ourselves into one, indivisible, union.”

Here, Bridges’ affinity for Karl Marx’s one-world system is glaringly obvious.

However, when Bridges was investigated beginning in 1934 for alleged ties to communist or radical parties, he was found not guilty—while according to Ruskin, an expert on Bridges, he was guilty of up to 95% of the charges. While he denied all communist ties to the government, he also allegedly went to several communist meetings; as Ruskin/ Bridges said, “Back then, everyone was a communist… but I did not advocate the overthrow of government.”

The remainder of this article can be read online at www. thecornellreview.com. Alexis Cashman is a sophomore in the School of Industrial and Labor Relations. She can be reached at arc269@cornell.edu.

Steven Lai/The Cornell Review

Liberal Media Excoriates Cornell Alum for Climate Change Research Casey Breznick Editor-in-Chief

C

ircle the wagons. That’s what climate change zealots, especially those among the liberal mainstream media, did as soon as William Briggs, Ph.D. ’98, and colleagues published a paper in January that claims to debunk billion-dollar global warming models used by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Briggs, who previously served as an Assistant Professor and statistician at the Weill Cornell Medical College and is now a self-employed consultant, co-authored the peer-reviewed paper entitled “Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model” along with

evidence we should distrust them,” Briggs told The Cornell Review in an email.

The paper was published in the Science Bulletin, a publication of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. According to Briggs, it has been downloaded over 10,000 times, making it one of the most-read pieces on climate change.

Naturally, many scientists disagreed with Briggs and company’s findings. A long article on The Carbon Brief featured numerous scientists criticizing elements of the simple model, including its assumptions regarding climate sensitivity, feedback loops, use of surface temperature, and “cherry picked” data.

Piers Forster, professor of physical climate change at the University of Leeds, was quoted

“If long-term climate models cannot make skillful predictions, and they have not, then there is not only no reason to trust them, but positive evidence we should distrust them.” -- William Briggs, Ph.D. ‘98 Harvard-Smithsonian physicist Dr. Willie Soon, British politician Christopher Monckton, and David Legates, a geography professor at the University of Delaware.

In brief, the paper’s four authors claim their model shows man-made global warming amounting to no more than one-third to onehalf of the IPCC’s predictions. Indeed, in the 25 years since the IPCC’s First Assessment Report, atmospheric temperature has warmed at half the rate originally predicted. The paper’s authors’ major contention is that IPCC models compute too high a level of climate sensitivity— the amount of warming caused by a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide—and that instead of 3.3 degrees Celsius of increased temperature per doubling it should be around one degree Celsius. The authors write: “[Complex climate models] incorrectly assume ‘temperature feedbacks’ would double or triple direct manmade greenhouse warming.”

In an interview aired on Breitbart Radio in late February, Briggs explained, “[T]he computer climate models on which the IPCC and others rely make forecasts where the temperature will be way up there. But, the reality is the temperature has been way down here. So these models are running hot!”

Briggs’ other main point is that scientific theories that make “bad predictions” are in error, and people and legislators should not make decisions based off of erroneous theories and models.

“If long-term climate models cannot make skillful predictions, and they have not, then there is not only no reason to trust them, but positive

saying, “[These] authors cherry pick numbers and incorrectly infer ranges of parameters from past IPCC reports to build their model ... I cannot see any robust estimates of climate change emerging from their study.”

Such debate is healthy and expected from the scientific community. After all, a discipline is not truly a science, or even worthwhile pursuing, if it cannot be challenged, and those challenges met with further challenges. Along the way, truth will sputter out, but that should only invite further debate and, in turn, more and more discoveries.

Yet, in reaction to Briggs’ work, climate change zealots panicked—how dare anyone, especially three academics, challenge the gospel?

Sheer heresy. To the mainstream media and activist academics, the authors were nothing more than a bunch of “deniers.”

In lock-step unison, The New York Times, the Guardian, the Washington Post, and the Boston Globe all attacked the paper and its authors. One can only surmise these media outlets poured more resources into covering, debunking, and smearing Briggs’ paper than they did in covering Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and the IRS targeting scandal and smearing the relevant (Democrat) politicians.

Co-authors Soon and Legates became the targets of smear campaigns, and the perpetually-outraged leftists are still trying to oust them from their jobs. The push to get them fired for beliefs which do not interfere with their jobs is reminiscent of the firing of Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich simply because he donated to a group

See Climate Change on page 8

6

‘Microaggressions’ a Macro Strategy of the Campus Left Here, there, and everywhere John Pedro Staff writer

I David Ticzon/The Cornell Review

Your Tuition Money Wasted

Arts Quad needle to be featured in PBS documentary Shay Collins Campus News Editor

T

uition may be increasing by 3.9% (or 4.25%-sorry ILRies, Aggies, and Human Ecology students), the Provost office may have been operating at a $55 million annual budget for half a decade, and SkortonCare may be steadily advancing, but fear not, sweet undergrad, the techno-phallic statue on the Arts Quad made it into a PBS documentary!

You heard that right: the very same people who brought us The Joy of Painting with Bob Ross want to feature the statue currently defacing the Art Quad’s Romanesque Revival architecture. Better yet, that means Kimsooja’s “A Needle Woman: Galaxy was a Metaphor, Earth is a Souvenir” not only blew past its December removal date, but will continue to overstay its welcome for months to come.

According to the Cornell Council for the Art’s (CCA) webpage, the sculpture is made out of an “iridescent nano polymer” and “transforms the transparent pavilion into a radiant spectrum with color as the polymer reflects various wavelengths of natural light.” Rumor has it that, if viewed from the right angle, the sculpture transmits the hue of the giant bonfire into which Cornell administrators toss our tuition dollars.

Why have we only now been graced with such a brilliantly abstruse structure? “A Needle Woman” is a featured artwork of the CCA biennial, which seeks to “explore an emerging

practice or idea in contemporary art that can be meaningfully situated and extended within a research university.” Of course, by “meaningfully situated” we mean sticking the damn thing in the middle of whatever quadrangle we feel like.

CCA Director Stephanie Owens has even more encouraging words for excited undergraduates. Owens explains that the statue remains erect as “there was some interest in keeping it on view for some important upcoming events on campus,” according to a Feb. 19 Cornell Daily Sun article. Cornell alumni, too, would like to see the physical beauty of just sort of throwing money at whatever crazy grant someone can convincingly BS. Furthermore, Owens also reports that “the duality between art and science presented by the sculpture has incited conversation on campus.”

Namely, fine artists and engineers alike could be found discussing how long they would struggle under crushing student debt before imploring someone to impale them with it.

Remember: the next time you hear someone label “A Needle Woman” an unnecessary, wasteful eyesore, correct them by telling that person the work of art is in fact an unnecessary, wasteful eyesore that was selected to be featured in a PBS documentary.

Shay Collins is a freshman in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at smc377@ cornell.edu.

Not sure what a microaggression is?

“Microaggressions are the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership.” - Psychology Today Images via Buzzfeed

t appears that not even foster children can escape the scorn of the left. On March 1, a Quinnipiac student forced the cancellation of a Latin American-themed philanthropy event hosted by Kappa Alpha Theta to benefit foster children. Why? Promotional posters for the event pictured maracas. The student deemed this culturally insensitive and blatantly inappropriate.

This anecdote represents a disturbing trend gaining steam on college campuses: the idea of microaggressions. A quick Google search reveals that microaggressions are defined as everyday verbal, or nonverbal slights, both intentional and unintentional, which implicitly or explicitly communicate negative, condescending and derogatory messages to individuals based on their status or identity. That

These types of eye-roll-eliciting examples signify the absurdity of microaggressions.

Whereas some people concern themselves with earning enough to make a living paycheck to paycheck, cloistered college students are outraged and indignant at the possibility that someone dares to tread on their immaculate self-conception.

My last name is Pedro: countless times I have been asked if I am Spanish or Mexican, yet I have no Hispanic heritage. This does not bother me, nor do I consider the asking of the question inappropriate. The language surrounding microaggressions is downright foolish.

Nor have these interactions led to “augmented morbidity and flattened confidence,” as Pierce suggests are some of the harmful impacts of microaggressions. Microaggressions are an insulated concept

“The rising prominence of microaggression claims on college campuses speaks to a larger trend in what is becoming an emphasis on inconsequential and insignificant perceived insults.” is, anything someone feels like deeming a microaggression qualifies as such.

To be sure, disparaging racial comments should never be tolerated anywhere by anyone.

It is of the utmost importance to live in a society that does not tolerate racism of any kind.

However, the rising prominence of microaggression claims on college campuses speaks to a larger trend in what is becoming an emphasis on inconsequential and insignificant perceived insults.

Chester M. Pierce, a Harvard professor, coined the term microaggression in the 1970s. It has become widespread in the last few years, including a notable example at UCLA where a group of minority students claimed their professor committed a microaggression by correcting their grammar. His crime was noting that “indigenous” is not capitalized.

In January, a Princeton student claimed he was a victim of a microaggression because students repeatedly asked him to pronounce “cool whip,” which apparently sounded funny due to his southern accent. The student later wrote a column for the The Daily Princetonian where he expressed that suffering microaggressions prompts binge drinking.

that do not translate to the real world, nor do they concern the millions of people actively engaged in positively contributing to society.

Imagine a random interview on a city street where people are asked if they’ve heard the word microaggression before, and what they think it means.

The results would be as bizarre as the idea behind the word itself.

Moreover, a study by Harvard University’s Voices of Diversity Project concluded that microaggressions are so harmful they might shorten the lifespans of the transgressed.

So long as there are people dying from disease, parents who cannot feed their families, and countries ravaged by war—occurrences that actually shorten lifespans—the concern and attention of people should be on these issues. After all, these ones actually matter for the betterment of the world we live in. Hasta la vista microaggressions.

John Pedro is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at jmp488@cornell.edu

7 You cannot speak on behalf of a nation when you have no mandate to do so.

Marie La Pen, leader of France’s Front National party

Excluding the Far-Right means that people’s voices aren’t being heard.

Cornell Professor Sydney Tarrow, law and government

The European Far-Right: Not So Right After All A Review of a recent Cornell panel discussion titled “Examining the Rise of Europe’s Radical Right” Roberto Matos Staff Writer

The Clarion Call

F

our panelists gathered to muse about the rise of Europe’s far-right political parties in light of the recent Paris terrorist attacks at a roundtable discussion on Feb. 27 organized by the Mario Einaudi Cornell Institute for European Studies.

What served as the discussion’s central focus was how the Charlie Hebdo attack has catapulted Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s third-largest political party and so-called “far-right” Front National, to the center stage of French— and overall European— political life. “[The Charlie Hebdo attacks] have given legitimacy to the claims that Islam and Islamic extremism are dangerous,” said panelist Cornell Professor Mabel Berezin, sociology.

The panelists noted that Le Pen’s populist and nationalist message of opposition to mass immigration, to multiculturalism, and to the “surrender of national economic sovereignty” to the international financiers and technocrats of the European Union is now taking root across the French countryside, especially among demographic and socio-economic groups that formerly supported her left-wing opponents. She has become a self-styled champion of the working class.

The establishment parties—and the mainstream elites dominating the French and broader European political scene—are losing support and are terrified of the appeal of her brand. They have lost the confidence of the voters.

The Far-Right: A Problem of Representation This panel discussion described the troubled relationship between the far-right and the mainstream establishment political parties. Indeed, the integrity of parliamentary process could be at stake.

“In the minds of millions of Europeans, everything the far-right predicted—particularly Le Pen in France—about mass immigration, about the ‘Muslim problem’, and about the Eurozone hegemony seems to be coming to pass. Mainstream center-left and center-right parties are not addressing these concerns. For this reason voters are flocking to the Right,” said Robin Best, assistant professor of political science at SUNY Binghamton.

Cornell Professor Sidney Tarrow, government and law, contends that, although it may be a promising sign to see mainstream center-left and center-right parties excluding the far right parties from governing coalitions, this should trouble those who care about representative norms and values. Tarrow argued that large segments of the electorate are supporting far right parties because they do not believe the mainstream parties are responsive to issues that concern them like mass immigration.

“If millions of people are casting votes for the farright parties yet aren’t having their opinions heard in

parliament, [then] that signifies the degree to which elites are out of touch with the sentiment of the mass public. Excluding the Far-Right means that people’s voices aren’t being heard,” Tarrow said.

In response, the center-right parties in Germany, Sweden and France have cautiously embraced some of the rhetoric of the far right. They have sought to steal momentum from the nationalist-populists by calling for controls on immigration and for curbing the authority of technocrats in Brussels.

Are these factions really ‘Far-Right’?

It may surprise the uninitiated reader that Marine Le Pen is a fervent advocate of the welfare state and regulation of private industry.

Interestingly, the far-right parties—particularly the National Front, the Swedish Democrats, the Dutch Freedom party, and the National Democratic party of Germany— have much more in common with the American progressive Left than it does the economically-libertarian American Right, particularly on economic issues.

In fact, their platforms appear to be more populist and anti-plutocratic than ethnic-nationalist.

“Her [La Pen’s] anti-austerity economic policies— to protect welfare, raise wages and pensions, cut utility prices and control consumer lending rates—strike a populist appeal, especially on the left,” the Financial Times writes.

These parties reject the German-directed austerity policy of slashing social safety net benefits, whereas the GOP embraces a kind of fiscal discipline which most European parties would find unpalatable.

Like popular Progressive scholars in the US, such as Robert Reich, these parties embrace trade protectionism and managed trade regimes in order to insulate domestic producers from the unregulated influx of foreign goods. Marine Le Pen has condemned the “ultraliberalism” of free trade as soulless and heartless.

She would not get on well in a Chamber of Commerce meeting or at a Cato Institute symposium.

Le Pen, whose screeds against neoliberalism resemble those of American Left college professors, is the most outspoken critic against the Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement, which she has called evidence that “globalization is a barbarity.”

Le Pen advocates for more stringent regulatory regimes to reign in foreign corporations, in an appeal to economic patriotism that resembles that of fair trade advocates in the American Democratic Party. “Today the world is in the hands of multinational corporations and large international finance.”

Notably, when anti-EU far Left party in Greece Syria - ascended to power in January and defied Brussels in the name of national monetary sovereignty, it was Le Pen, and not European socialists, who heartily congratulated him!

Like the Left as a whole, the Far Right appeals to working-class populism by demanding minimum wage

and base-line benefits guarantees against the “international plutocracy.”

The Far Right parties are implacably hostile to tight money policies, primarily out of their aversion to “foreign investors who buy up the assets and management of the country.” Le Pen regularly condemns foreign speculators, and recently mused about nationalizing the banks, just as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren supporters often do.

Le Pen stresses the importance of “national control” - control over the flow of capital, labor, goods and currency in and out of the country. The far-right parties, using nomenclature remarkably similar to that of the anti-globalization and anarchist groups in the United States, believes that financial integration exploits working class people at home and destroys the basis for locally-owned, import-competing firms.

All of these positions are held by the European populist Left and the American populist Left.

Distinction: Left and Right The difference between the Left and the Far-Right is that the latter hinges its critique of unregulated capitalism on its belief that globalism is a threat to the national character and the timeless cultural soul of the native-born ethno-core of the country in question; these are concerns that the Left considers “ethnocentrist” and racially chauvinist.

The Far-Right, using the economic populism of the Left in order to defend tribalist, nationalist interests, appeals to the working class people’s insecurities over demographic change.

The prospect of limiting immigration is on many people’s minds, even though the mainstream parties consider it politically incorrect to broach this idea directly, with the exception of Labor parties in Germany and England. Some argue that they fail to do so at their own peril, because many of their traditional constituents, typically blue collar people, resent the fastpaced transformation of small communities and huddled cities.

The working class also resents the influx of cheap labor, which drives up competition for (already) lowwage jobs, drives down and stagnates wages, and contributes to the (already palpable) angst of the working people.

The term “far right” describes a more cartoonish and overly simplistic catch-all label. It has been used to describe groups so diverse and varied that they bare very little in common - from the limited-government advocating Tea Party to the totalitarian National Socialists.

One thing is for sure, the Far-Right represents a rebellion against consensus positions of the ruling elites.

It is a specter haunting the discredited and enfeebled political establishment of Europe.

Roberto Matos is a senior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at rlm387@cornell.edu.

8

Cornell Alumni Watch: Wisemen and Fools FOOL

WISEMAN

Liberal blabber-mouth and connoisseur of the ad hominen Keith Olbermann ‘79 was suspended from his second-rate ESPN show for a week because he called Penn State students fundraising for charity “Pitiful...” on Twitter.

CEO of The Baupost Group, Seth Klarman ‘79 is successfully navigating volatile equity markets with several bullish investments in energy and pharmaceutical companies. His fund has been one of the most successful as of late.

FOOL

Bill Maher ‘78 ridiculed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress as well as the reactions of Republican lawmakers in attendance, stating “I thought they [Republicans] were gay for Reagan.”

Compiled by Casey Breznick

Cornell Certainly Anti-Israel, But Anti-Semitic? Many Say Not Continued from front page

Image via NY Daily News UNBROKEN PROMISES: “I’m sort of the anti-Christ to the Conservative Party.” - Andrew Cuomo, New York Governor

NY Dems Hold Citizens Hostage Albany Dems tie DREAM Act vote to bill giving citizens state financial aid Casey Breznick Editor-in-Chief

F

or the third consecutive year, the New York State Assembly, controlled by Democrats, has passed a state DREAM Act, which if adopted by the State Senate and signed

by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, would make illegal immigrants who are state residents eligible for in-state tuition rates.

Supporters of the bill argue it would enable more illegal aliens the ability to attend college and thus contribute more to the economy and tax base.

As has been the case thrice, Senate Republicans are staunchly opposed to the measure, arguing that it incentivizes illegal immigration. However, this time Cuomo’s $142 billion budget ties the DREAM Act to the Tuition Assistance Program and the proposed Education Investment Tax Credit.

According to a USA Today report, this was a “strategic play” on the part of Cuomo because Senate Republicans back the tax credit but must vote either

for both it and the DREAM Act or against both. There is also widespread, bipartisan support for the Tuition Assistance Program, which grants financial aid to citizens whose families meet certain requirements, but this issue is tied to the DREAM Act too. Both Republicans and Democrats have expressed wishes to vote on the issues separately, but Cuomo, apparently, is more interested in sticking it to Republicans and incentivizing illegal immigration than assisting the citizens of his own state who elected him.

What is going on here is politicking, not governing. Even if it is the most ardent desire of Cuomo and Albany Democrats to pass the DREAM Act, there is no excuse in holding voters and citizens hostage to do so.

New Yorkers: please vote ‘em all out of office.

Casey Breznick is a sophomore in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. He can be reached at cb628@cornell. edu.

anti-Israel protests and demonstrations, and has spearheaded the push toward a Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement at Cornell.

Events cited in the Center’s report include SJP’s failed attempt to get the Student Assembly (SA) to adopt BDS in the form of Resolution 72 in Spring 2014; the overtaking of the SA meeting in April 2014 in which this resolution was proposed; and SJP’s raucous protest in November 2014 that involved the harassment and threatening of Jewish and pro-Israeli students present.

One SJP-er, non-student and professional protester Kat Yang Stevens, shouted at Jewish students “Fuck you, Zionist scum.”

Further, even though SJP may be the largest anti-Israel voice on campus, this same protester who nearly spat on a Jewish student’s face was welcomed into the Africana Center later that week to moderate a panel on “Resisting Domination.”

In spite of these events, many Jewish students disagree with Cornell’s placement on the list.

Ethan Coy ’17 told the Review, “I’m a bit surprised to see that [Cornell is on the list]. I don’t feel discriminated against, but I can’t speak for all Jews on campus.”

The Cornell administration also condemned Cornell’s placement on the list.

“The university managed these incidents while preserving the right to responsible free expression on our campus. The article does a great disservice to Cornell,” Vice President of University Relations Joel Malina wrote in a statement to the Review.

Cornell Law student and president of Cornell’s chapter of the Louis D. Brandeis Center, a nonprofit organization focused on combating anti-Semitism and discrimination on college campuses, Kate Sapristein, law, believes that there is not only anti-Semitism on Cornell’s campus, but that it is a growing problem worldwide.

It is not only “a Jewish issue,” she told the Review, “but is part of a larger universal human rights issue, which, I think, unites the entire community.”

Cornell Law student and founding member Noga Benmor-Piltch says that the LDB Center was founded to foster dialogue about issues surrounding Israel and Jewish students on college campuses.

“Anti-Semitism is prevalent, both in latent and patent ways, on Cornell’s campus,” Benmor-Piltch added.

When asked why Cornell is #2 on Horowitz’s list, she noted, “I, personally, have heard anti-Semitic speech both in and out of the law school community…the most educated of individuals don’t necessarily understand the difference between valid criticism of Israel and Anti-Semitic speech.”

The Louis D. Brandeis Center is dedicated to education about the issue of anti-Semitism and believes that the best way for the Cornell community to combat this issue is “to open the dialogue in an intellectual and calm manner, addressing challenges that all parties…face.”

Benmor-Piltch said added, “On the other hand, these conversations often quickly turn into an Israel ‘bash fest.’”

Many voice concerns about the potential detriment of the lack of counter-activism from Jewish students against groups like SJP. Recently, America’s Rabbi Shmuley Boteach stated in a warning to Jewish college students, “Ignorance and apathy are infecting the Jewish student body politic.”

The rabbi, spurred by Stanford’s recent successful divestment vote, said that Jewish students were getting their history wrong and cowering in fear that defending Israel would lead to rejection from their peers.

So is there a void here at Cornell that pro-Israel students need to fill? Melissa Gingold ’17, a Jewish student, thinks not.

“We have a significant level of activism here on campus,” Gingold said. “When BDS was up for a vote by the student assembly, over 100 Jewish students came to peacefully sit in on the meeting and played a large role in tabling BDS. When SJP had an anti-Israel protest on Ho Plaza on a Friday, at least 30 Jewish students took time out from their classes and work to peacefully counter the protest.”

Even if Cornell doesn’t deserve its spot on the list of the most anti-Semitic campuses, it should be a priority of all pro-Israel students to counter the attacks on Israel and on Jewish students by groups such as SJP as well as individuals who condemn and wish to divest from Israel, before we become even more blind to this imperative issue of civil rights here in our own home.

Laura Gundersen is a sophomore in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. She can be reached at lcg36@cornell.edu.

9

The Review Interviews Student Assembly Presidential Candidates

Interviews conducted by Shay Collins

Juliana Batista ‘16, SA Executive VP

Jeffrey Breuer ‘16

Matthew Stefanko ‘16, SA VP of Finance

Will you vote for a Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) resolution, and why or why not?

“As President you serve as a neutral party unless you step down from chairing the meeting and I would like to make note of that in this for question 1 and 2. If the Student Assembly is going to tackle geopolitical issues we must be armed with the appropriate knowledge from both sides and guided by academics who are facilitators of action oriented conversation. Seeing that BDS was not debated last year I would need a convincing argument to divest. Again, I would not want to jeopardize the financial aid given to students or funding for student-oriented departments to further the cause.”

“It is my personal belief that some issues truly beyond the scope of the Student Assembly, and while of great importance in the current geopolitical conversation, might be cause for more friction between administrators and student leaders. Students should be able to voice these concerns and advocate for causes they believe in, but I believe an issue of this magnitude separates students rather than complete the SA’s goal of united opinions of student sentiment.”

“The events surrounding Resolution 72 (Resolution Urging Cornell University to Divest from Companies Profiting from Israeli Occupation and Human Rights Violations) showed that the Student Assembly is a great forum for student discussion. However, resolutions are intended to represent the sentiment of the student body and, thus, passing a resolution on such a divided issue does not make sense. I would still encourage students to bring forward resolutions that talk about the big issues to utilize Student Assembly as an effective forum.”

Will you vote for a fossil fuel divestment resolution, and why or why not?

“It depends on the content of the resolution. I recently voted yes for advertising the divestment of coal that is already incorporated in the financials of the University. However, I would not want to jeopardize the financial aid given to students or funding for studentoriented departments to further the sustainability cause.”

“I think fossil fuel divestment is an issue that is very important to moving towards a sustainable future, and would very much support divestment from these sources. However, I think if a thoughtful discussion was to take place, I would want to be sitting down with administrators and work towards actually making things happen rather than have the resolution passed over when put on the President’s desk.”

“I don’t think any students are antienvironment, but the question is if there are people who believe that divestment would diminish our endowment.

With regards to the coal divestment resolution, even the administration saw coal investments as non-profitable, and I think similar analysis should apply to a fossil fuel divestment resolution.”

“I believe in diversity, in every sense of the word. This statement includes diversity of thought. Students have the option to attend the speech or exercise their power to not attend the speech.”

“Well, I think it would depend on the context of the speech. If the speaker is being brought to talk about an issue that some students disagree with, it’s important to allow different viewpoints to be expressed, with the caveat being when such speech causes harm to students.”

“I don’t believe that screening speakers is a concern of the SA--at the end of the day, that decision belongs to the event’s organizers and the administration.

My personal take is that there is a difference between a controversial and an inherently hurtful speaker. I think that controversial speakers should absolutely be heard, but a speaker who will threaten or seriously offend Cornell students would only be harmful to our community.”

If a controversial speaker was scheduled to speak at Cornell, would you support or oppose the cancellation of the speech if students were opposed to its content?

Political Correctness Eroding U-Minnesota Continued from page 4

have never once been stopped for being a foreigner on my campus or in the University of Minnesota campus.”

But, my dear fighters for correctness, do not worry, for UM is taking more action against all the mean conservatives who are spreading the evil disease that is free speech. The PCP strikes again, in the shape of the Student Service Fees Committee (SSFC), the equivalent of our very own SAFC, the organism that provides student organizations with money for their activities. The SSFC is supposed to grant money based on a fair, equal system. However, it seems that, paraphrasing that old adage, all organizations are equal, but some are more equal than others. This is because the SSFC recently pointed out that it might cut funding to the Minnesota Republic, our cousin newspaper at UM, because of “material that demonstrated an overt lack of sensitivity to the portrayal of members of the Arab world.” In 2011, the student newspaper had published a cover that pictured a man dressed as an

Islamic terrorist with a gun burning an issue of the Minnesota Republic with the words, “Terrorists hate the Minnesota Republic.” The SSFC stated that “in the future, close attention may be paid to the content published by Students for a Conservative Voice to ensure that any material that is produced with student fee funds does not compromise the cultural harmony of the campus and to ensure that the material that is produced is not at odds with the criteria in place for receiving this funding.”, in violation not only of the First Amendment, but of the SSFC rules themselves, that protects students’ rights to print content without hurting their request for funding. It was also reported that their newsstands have also been vandalized and signs promoting the Minnesota Republic have been ripped up and thrown on the ground. “[The new policy] sets an unfortunate precedent in regards to the administration caving into the ‘politically correct’ demands of leftist groups who hold protests

in violation of existing laws,” said Koskinen, referring to UM leftist student group Whose Diversity’s recent occupation of the school’s president’s office.

The problem at UM, Cornell, and across this country is that there is too much political correctness. We have been forced to become so color-blind that we forget that we are even different, in the midst of all this nonsense. This fight is not only about political correctness, but also about free speech as a whole. You can be conservative, liberal, gay, devious, disgusting or whatever you want— you should still be able to say whatever you want and however you want as long as you are not stepping on someone else’s freedom of expression.

Andres Sellitto is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at as2747@cornell.edu.

10

‘Molly’ Sends 12 at Wesleyan to Hospital Abhinav Saikia Staff Writer

T

alk to a hardcore drug user and you might hear him or her exult about “Molly,” a designer drug supposedly composed solely of MDMA, the active ingredient in Ecstasy. Originally, MDMA was synthesized as an anti-depressant agent, and its origins as a medicinal drug have given Molly an aura of authenticity and supposed purity. The truth could not be further separated from the word on the streets.

In the last few years, the drug has become a toxic mixture of lab-created chemicals; dangerous synthetic drugs that have not been tested and are produced in widely varying strengths. The DEA claims that only 13% of the Molly seized in New York the last four years actually contained any MDMA, and even then it often was mixed with other drugs. Users essentially have no idea what they’re taking or at what dose. Unlike other illegal drugs that have known effects on the body, the formulas for these synthetic drugs keep changing, and they’re manufactured with no regard to how they affect the user.

What makes it even more dangerous is that it is often being marketed to the youth; first time drug users and teens are susceptible to be driven in to the hype behind the drug.

Twelve unfortunate university students at Wesleyan were

unfortunately exposed to the dangers of this drug; two left in critical condition while one student was found unresponsive with no vital signs before extreme measures by paramedics saved his life. Among the four students arrested for the incident was the founder of Wesleyan’s Students for Sensible Drug Policy.

Across campuses in America, students and young adults are being exposed to Molly and other synthetic drugs, and the crisis is only getting worse.

The fastest-emerging drug problem in the United States is the synthetic drug market; and the chemicals in Molly have been found in nearly every state in the U.S. And it rakes in enormous profits; the DEA reportedly seized $95 million dollars’ worth of synthetic drugs in the span of two days during a crackdown.

To combat the growing trade, Congress passed the Synthetic Drug Abuse Prevention Act in July 2012, which controlled 26 compounds by name. But this law is utterly ineffective; there are literally hundreds of compounds which could be used to synthesize these drugs, and every time the government makes one illegal, chemists simply alter the formula slightly to make it a substance that is no longer controlled.

Abhinav Saikia is a sophomore in the College of Engineering. He can be reached at as2586@cornell.edu.

Cornellians in Court Laura Gundersen Managing Editor

T

wo former Cornellians are in the news for their criminal court cases.

Former Ph.D. candidate Blazej Kot’s appeal claiming that insanity had made him unfit to stand trial was rejected last week.

Kot was convicted in 2010 of the second-degree murder of his wife after he slashed her throat with a box cutter on an afternoon jog in June 2009, and then set fire to their home in attempt to cover up evidence. Kot’s wife, Caroline Coffey, was a post-doctoral student in Cornell’s College of Veterinary Medicine.

The appellate court decided that Kot was competent and appeared to understand the court proceedings. Kot will serve 25 years at Sullivan Correctional Facility to be released in 2034.

Charlie Tan, former Cornell student ‘17 accused of the death of his father in early February, has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder this past Thursday.

The court room flooded with supporters of Tan, who were relieved to hear bail was set at $50,000 cash, a great reduction from the Prosecutor’s requested $500,000 dollar sum. Tan was required to turn over his Canadian passport and, with Cornell’s approval, return to his studies under the conditions of the set bail. His jury trial will begin Sep. 14.

Image via Legal Insurrection

Net Neutrality a Hostile Government Takeover?

If it ain’t broken, Washington will find a way to fix it Matthew Lin Contributor

“

It won’t slow down my Netflix” was the unofficial rallying cry of the proponents of net neutrality. Netflix itself also supported the federal government’s move to seize regulatory authority over the Internet under the auspices of “greater equality.” Soon enough, they might just reap what they have sewn.

On Feb. 26, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), led by Democrat Tom Wheeler, adopted a new set of regulations that classified broadband internet as a public utility under the Communications Act of 1934— that is, a common carrier service treated no different from phone communications and cable television.

The net neutrality debate pitted, and will continue to pit, not just free marketers against over-regulators, it pitted Internet-based companies, like Apple and Netflix, against Internet Service Providers (ISPs), like Comcast and Verizon.

Under the new set of FCC regulations, ISPs are barred from charging consumers or businesses more for preferential or speedier access to certain types of online content. In other words, everyone has to move along at the same speed on the Internet.

According to Professor Fred Schneider, computer science, net neutrality is not a simple, single-slogan topic. All parties involved--ISPs, Internet companies, regulators, governments, consumers--have disparate, self-motivated interests. Schneider also cautioned jumping to conclusions regarding claims the FCC has taken control of the Internet, as there are many factors still unknown regarding the specificities of the regulations, as well as exactly whom benefits from them. “[Net neutrality] is a complicated issue, and people have a tendency to define complicated issues in terms of simple bumper-stickers: ‘it sounds good; it should be for our networks’ [and] ‘FCC is bad; it should not regulate,’” Schneider said.

Those in favor of a free market, Schneider says, would oppose net neutrality, as it prevents companies from engaging in free market competition and price discrimination. Price discrimination sounds worse than what it really is: it refers to companies charging different consumers different prices based on their willingness to pay. It’s a classic staple of free market economics, a win-win situation. It helps companies earn

higher profits, and allows consumers to achieve maximum utility.

Still, critics of net neutrality assert that opening the door to government control over such an amorphous and fast-evolving entity such as the internet will stifle innovation and possibly invites government encroachment on online free speech. Schneider, however, argues that ISP discrimination in itself might lead to censorship if companies can decide which online content receives preferential treatment.

The classification of internet as a common carrier service is a double-edged sword for ISPs and the greater economy at large. ISPs will lose local monopolies, as now any company can lay the cables necessary to start their own network.

However, at the same time, new local service providers for the free market would lead to lowered profits, and the possibility of utility companies coming and going. The market will eventually stabilize, however, and innovation will be accelerated by the coming of these new carriers.

“[Net neutrality] is a complicated issue, and people have a tendency to define complicated issues in terms of simple bumper-stickers: ‘it sounds good; it should be for our networks’ [and] ‘FCC is bad; it should not regulate.’” - Professor Fred Schneider, computer science However, by losing the ability to shape traffic, all internet users will become more vulnerable. Before, when a computer became hijacked for an illegal purpose, an ISP could cut them off from the Internet to the benefit of the network, the victim, and the company.

Only time will tell if the five commissioners of the FCC made the right decision about the proper management of the American internet.

Given the dismal track record of government intervention in free, competitive markets, it is unlikely this decision was the right one. If so, the effects will certainly be disastrous.

Matthew Lin is a junior in the College of Engineering. He can be reached at ml923@cornell. edu.

11

Senior Reflection: It’s That Time Kushagra Aniket Editor Emeritus

The parting words of Editor Emeritus Kushagra Aniket ‘15

F

our years ago, I joined the Review partly out of a curious accident.

At that time, I did not know anything about the antecedents of this newspaper or what it stood for. Neither did I expect to be involved with it for a significant portion of my time at Cornell.

During my freshman year, I registered for several organizations, including The Cornell Review, at the annual Club Fest. The next day I received an invitation to attend the Review’s first meeting of the year. In those days, I treated any message received on my Cornell email as important and solemn communication. Consequently, I showed up to the first meeting.

The room inside Goldwin Smith Hall was packed. The outgoing Editor-in-Chief Dennis Shiraev’12 welcomed me at the entrance. After listening to the discussion for the next half hour, I realized that this publication was political in nature and its staff was fairly non-hierarchical. Both sounded to be attractive propositions for someone who was new to the campus and wanted to pursue his passion for writing.

As my first assignment, I opted to cover a guest lecture by a former Libyan Presidential Candidate and Yale Law School Professor Chibli Mallat. Coming right after the Arab Spring, the speaker made a passionate case for viewing the regime change in Libya as a “non-violent revolution”. In my review of the lecture, I argued that this perception was both mistaken and misleading. Subsequent developments in Libya and elsewhere in the Middle East largely vindicated my stand. The editors appreciated my first article and encouraged me to continue writing for the Review. Thus started my long association with the Review.

Another well-received article from those days was a philosophical defense of conservatism entitled “Why Do We Conserve?” In fact, our veteran columnist Roberto Matos ’15 credits this article as his major motivation for joining the Review. In the next few years, I primarily covered foreign policy, international affairs and campus issues for the Review. During the politically exciting months around the U.S. Presidential Elections, I also served as the National News Editor.

In my own time at Cornell, I have witnessed the substantial progress made in expanding the readership, visibility, and influence of the Review. While the Collegiate Network (CN) recognized the Review as the “best campus publication” in 2012, we were able to establish a significant online presence through the efforts of former Editor-in-Chief Lucas Policastro ’13. The Campus Liberty Project started by Alfonse Muglia ’14 in 2013 in response to a Student Assembly proposal to mandate a compulsory “social justice course requirement” also gained a lot of traction. Internally, we attempted to create a sense of identity for future generations of writers by researching and documenting the history of the Review and its predecessor publications.

Today I am delighted to see that the baton has passed on to a very dynamic and capable team of Reviewers. I have confidence the Review will achieve greater success under their leadership. But writing on the eve of Cornell’s sesquicentennial celebrations, it is appropriate that I provide some parting advice to the future leaders of the Review.

First, uphold journalistic ethics and decorum: While the Sun may be permitted certain indulgences from time to time, we at the Review have a different tradition to defend. Verify your facts before you report them. Do your best to distinguish between plain news and editorial content.

Second, continue to embrace diversity: Throughout my time at the Review, I have argued that intellectual diversity is equally if not more important than any other aspect of diversity. Hence, the preservation of different political viewpoints within our larger ideological ambit is necessary for the Review’s success.

Third, do not be afraid to ask difficult questions: The Review has a long tradition of openly but respectfully challenging University officials, public demonstrators, and speakers at events. A lot of our content is actually generated through this strategy. As long as one is on the right side of the law and civility, there is no need to be afraid to exercise your freedom of expression.

Finally, nurture and maintain strong relations with our alumni: Since its foundation in 1984, the Review has produced men and women of outstanding caliber. Our long list of alumni includes political pundits, authors and journalists. Moreover, recent graduates have moved on to pursue careers in a variety of fields ranging from investment banking to engineering physics. Our alumni network, if tapped properly, can serve as an incredible resource for many years to come.

In a few months from now, I will graduate from the College of Arts and Sciences with degrees in mathematics, economics and statistical science. During my four years on the Hill, I have tried to enrich my undergraduate experience through academics, research, student government and campus journalism. I regard it as matter of pride that the Review has been a central part of that experience as a platform for self-expression and a source of intellectual inspiration.

Kushagra Aniket is a graduating senior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He may be reached at ka337@cornell.edu.

Climate Change Dogmatists Continued from page 5 in supoprt of California’s Proposition 8, a measure that banned gay marriage.

Forecast the Facts, a front-group of the progressive Center for American Progress, started an online petition specifically targeting Soon, whom they accuse of accepting money from the fossil fuel industry. The petition reads at the end: “Tell the Smithsonian: Don’t lend your good name to fossil fuel-funded climate denial. Drop Dr. Willie Soon.”

The authors have denied this claim, and since the Science Bulletin published the paper they obviously believed it met academic standards.

“Not one penny, not one iota of consideration of any kind, was received from any source for the writing of this paper,” writes Briggs on his blog, Statisticians to the Stars!.

Briggs, in the same post, also points out that the single-biggest source of research funding is government, and that no one challenges conflict of interest when government funds research.

This whole episode involving a prominent Cornell alumnus is a prime showcase of the deteriorating state of the country with regards to civil debate. Scientists challenging an unproven scientific theory (that is, doing their job) run the risk of incurring the wrath of the most insane, neurotic activists and protesters; they can even lose their jobs just for trying to construct models.

A long time ago being liberal meant standing up for freedom of speech and freedom of thought. This liberalism of old sought to tear down the barriers to intellectual and material growth erected by religious and mystical superstition and the decrees of kings and tyrants. It was championed by free thinkers, free thinkers, and free men—or, at least, those who yearned to live free.

Today, being liberal is synonymous with squashing freedom of speech and ideas in order to conform to a very specific paradigm of thought erected by none other than the modern-day kings and tyrants of the political left. This type of liberalism is infected by political correctness, historical revisionism, and cultural Marxism, and is championed by the unfree and those who desperately wish to shackle themselves back in chains.

This inversion and perversion of liberalism is most easily observed when it comes to criticizing radical Islam, open borders, multiculturalism, and climate change dogma. These criticisms are simply disallowed: intellect is held hostage by academia, the mainstream media, and political elites for purely political purposes.

Climate change dogma—distinct from climate science, which is perfectly legitimate—is scary, to put it mildly. Ironically, those who adhere to climate change dogma are decidedly anti-science: they refuse to allow scientists do their jobs by challenging prevailing notions. This dogma inspires religious-like zealotry in its defense and evangelizing, and its demands of ideological conformity would make Stalin and Mao proud.

So long as men like Dr. Soon and Dr. Briggs remain committed in the fight against anti-science liberals, the opportunity for truth to emerge from its obscured depths still exists. That opportunity, however, is rapidly shrinking.

Casey Breznick is a sophomore in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. He can be reached at cb628@cornell.edu.

Rise above liberal bias and abuse

Join The Cornell Review David Ticzon/The Cornell Review

12

Wisemen & Fools

The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.

Ayn Rand

Although a soldier by profession, I have never felt any sort of fondness for war, and I have never advocated it, except as a means of peace.

Ulysses S. Grant

I have a very strict gun control policy: if there’s a gun around, I want to be in control of it.

Clint Eastwood

I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill’...What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?

John Conyers, D-MI

We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.

Hillary Clinton

Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far.

Teddy Roosevelt

There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it’s right.

Martin Luther King Jr. Elections have consequences.

Scott Walker

So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear: there is no alternative way, so far discovered, of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.

Milton Friedman

I want to go up to the closest white person and say: ‘You can’t understand this, it’s a black thing’ and then slap him, just for my mental health.

Charles Barron, NYC Councilman

I’m a conservative because I believe in peace--real peace--not just the peace of mind. I’m a conservative because we understand that real peace comes from the Marine Corps, not the Peace Corps.

Allen West

We are not a nation of immigrants. We are a nation of citizens. A nation of immigrants who have become citizens.

We are a nation of citizens and I’m sick and tired of the American citizen being demeaned and treated as a second class citizen while anyone who crosses the border is treated as the most virtuous human being on the face of the earth.

Mark Levin

Anti-Semitism is exactly the same as delousing. Getting rid of lice is not a question of ideology, it is a matter of cleanliness.

Heinrich Himmler

Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.

Barry Goldwater Global environmentalists have said and written enough to leave no doubt that their goal is to destroy the prosperous economies of the world’s richest nations.

Russell Kirk We know that no one person can succeed unless everybody else succeeds.

Howard Dean

Change change change change change change change change change change change change change change change change Barack Obama change change change change

Just the Numbers 8,103

Cornell’s full and part-time staff as of Fall 2013

4.25%

Annual tuition increase for ILR, CALS, and Human Ecology students

47

Number of people killed in a recent Boko Haram suicide attack in Nigeria

32%

Adults 25 and older who have college degrees in the United States

2

Cornell’s place on the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s list of most anti-Semitic campuses

13%

Amount of club drug ‘Molly’ seized in New York over the last four years that contained MDMA

$18,200,000,000,000 Our ever-increasing national debt

JOIN THE REVIEW Send us an email at cornellreview@cornell.edu Join us at 158 Goldwin Smith Hall on Tuesdays at 5pm.