JHU POLITIK
the
I
SEPTEMBER 8, 2015
VOLUME XVIII, ISSUE II
the
JHU POLITIK EDITORS-IN-CHIEF Christine Server & Juliana Vigorito MANAGING EDITOR Mira Haqqani
HEAD WRITER Evan Harary
ASSISTANT EDITORS Dylan Etzel Preston Ge Shrenik Jain Sathvik Namburar
POLICY DESK EDITOR Arpan Ghosh
CREATIVE DIRECTOR Diana Lee
MARYLAND EDITOR David Hamburger
COPY EDITOR Zachary Schlosberg WEBMASTER Position Open MARKETING & PUBLICITY Chiara Wright
CAMPUS EDITOR Christina Selby
STAFF WRITERS Olga Baranoff Dylan Cowit Rosellen Grant George Gulino Morley Musick Sathvik Namburar Corey Payne
FACULTY ADVISOR Charlotte O’Donnell
2 the JHU POLITIK
• September 8, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue II
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
4 5 6 7 8 9
Week in Review: Pop Culture Edition Olga Baranoff ’16 A Freshman’s Perspective on Hopkins’ Sexual Orientation Presentation Caroline Lupetini ’19 Baal’s Beheading:
How ISIS Annihilates Our History
Darius Mostaghimi ’18
Reflecting on Senator Cardin’s Forum on the Iranian Nuclear Deal Dylan Etzel ’17 The Aftermath of the Anthem Hack:
Determining Responsibility in the Digital Age
Haziq Siddiqi ’17
The Looming Inevitable Recession:
Why China’s Economic Slowdown Foreshadows the Next Global Recession
Arpan Ghosh ’17
Volume XVIII, Issue II • September 8, 2015 •
the JHU POLITIK
3
Week in Review: Pop Culture Edition by Olga Baranoff ’16, Staff Writer White Squad: Provoking MTV’s Audience to Consider Racial Privilege This past Sunday, MTV hosted the Video Music Awards (VMAs), during which they aired a commercial for White Squad, “a team of carefully selected white people who help people of color enjoy white advantage.” The premise of the “business” is that people of color can hire White Squad to stand in for them during “racially unbalanced” situations – like hailing a cab, renting an apartment, or appearing in court. The satirical advertisement was produced by MTV’s “Look Different” campaign, an initiative to help people “erase the hidden racial, gender, and anti-LGBT bias all around us.” According to MTV, the commercial was meant to illustrate how white privilege works and impacts people’s lives. Viewer reactions on Twitter ranged from confusion to outrage and anger to affirmation. While critics were quick to point to MTV’s own biases, the commercial’s parody of racial bias was provocative, and it clearly captured viewers’ attention, forcing them to stop and consider the underlying issues of privilege in everyday situations.
Twitter War over Race: Latest Reflection of Divides in Music Industry For the typical viewer, the actual awards given out at the VMAs are irrelevant compared to the entertainment the event provides. For an artist, however, winning an award at the VMAs can provide affirmation and value. When the VMA nominees were announced in July, the singer Nicki Minaj took to Twitter in response to being passed over for the coveted Video of the Year award. Minaj suggested that MTV did not nominate her because she was not a certain “kind” of artist—i.e., thin, white and blonde. Minaj’s larger implication, that the cultural contributions of black women are often overlooked, set off a debate with other artists that followed her to the award show this past Sunday. While the “Twitter war” with Taylor Swift and the award show drama with Miley Cyrus were more spectacle than substance, Minaj’s comments carry a truth about racial divides in the music industry. Many white artists like Iggy Azalea and Miley Cyrus appropriate images, dance, clothing, and sound from black culture and, some would argue, end up more successful than their black counterparts. The industry is greatly influenced by and built on black talent, but these artists, as Minaj pointed out, go largely unrecognized for their cultural influence.
The Rise of Racially Diverse Comedians In light of his upcoming takeover of The Daily Show on September 28, Trevor Noah recently released a promo promising, “nothing’s going to change.” Despite what Noah may say, a young, black man hosting a major late night show is a significant departure from the usual middle-aged, white hosts. Jon Stewart, the previous host of The Daily Show, came under fire this summer after the comedian Wyatt Cenac, a former writer and correspondent for the show, spoke publicly about a racially charged exchange with Stewart. Perhaps the advent of a new black host will allow for more black writers on The Daily Show and other shows in general, which would mitigate Cenac’s valid concerns over often being the only black person in the room. While Noah may say that nothing will change, comedy certainly could benefit from becoming more inclusive of black voices. Last year, Slate pointed out the racial dynamics of comedians at Saturday Night Live, presenting a long list of black comedians who joined and left unhappily, and a shorter list of those who had long, successful careers on the show. Noah has the opportunity to significantly impact comedy’s culture and perceptions, becoming the rare prominent black personality speaking to a primarily white audience. ■
4 the JHU POLITIK
• September 8, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue II
A Freshman’s Perspective on Hopkins’ Sexual Orientation by Caroline Lupetini ’19, Contributing Writer “You guys might have to see this confidential resource by the time I’m done with you.”
F
ifteen minutes after keynote speaker Tim Mousseau shared his heart-wrenching story of discovering he had been a victim of sexual assault, the above comment, referring to one type of protocol for reporting a sexual assault, was made in a freshman’s First-Year Mentor group chat. My friend showed me the text because she was disturbed that someone would share a rape joke shortly after Mousseau recounted losing friends for objecting to rape humor. The comment proved Mousseau’s point: any one of the roughly five thousand undergraduates at Hopkins could commit a sex crime. I could be sitting next to a victim or perpetrator in one of my classes. All Johns Hopkins University freshmen were required to attend the seminar sponsored by the JHU Sexual Response and Prevention Unit entitled “Retaking Our Story: Reframing the Sexual Assault Conversation,” including Mousseau’s keynote speech. Mousseau’s story was integral to an effective discussion about sexual assault, but the information was shared too late to be considered relevant, and the University’s direct communication with the freshman class sounded impersonal and distant. Hopkins’ first failure at discussing sexual assault was its timing. The presentation was chronologically irrelevant: it was on the fourth day of new student Orientation, by which time three nights of partying had occurred. Had Mousseau given his talk the first or second day of Orientation, young men and women entering the freshman class might have better understood their responsibilities when at a party. Because consent cannot be given when one or both parties are drunk, bystanders have an obligation to break up a questionable “hook-up.” I consider myself fairly well-informed on issues relating to Title IX, but still felt I learned something from Mousseau’s challenge to the freshman class: to not only look out for your friends when they get drunk, but also for strangers. Mousseau’s address was relatable and put in terms 18- and 19-year-olds could understand. However, we may have gotten more out of it prior to experiencing college social culture.
Boyle spoke only in abstracts, sharing extremely valuable information, but without any relevancy to our lives as college students. Her banal way of discussing sexual assault – without acknowledgement of instances that have occurred at JHU – meant there was no sense of urgency to discuss the relevance of sexual assault to our own campus. During Orientation week, President Daniels lauded the Class of 2019 as the University’s most accomplished group of freshman ever. I would like the University to treat us like adults, but I know that my peers do not always embody the maturity suggested by their applications. When Shriver Hall erupted in laughter at the mention of the word “masturbation,” I realized that the University should have a more serious conversation about sexual assault. I feel that the University talked at us, not with us. There was neither a forum for questions from the audience, nor any stimuli for discussion within our First-Year Mentor groups about the presentation after the fact. I sometimes wish the University would sternly present the punishments for these actions and treat us as the young audience we truly are. A discussion about Title IX does not have to be harsh (Mousseau’s speech had several lighthearted moments), but an auditorium of snickering young adults makes any attempt at real gravity ineffective. Knowing the consequences of an action does not always deter it, but it cannot hurt to try. Hopkins has made improvements from its past discussions about sexual assault; for example, the Orientation presentation on Title IX was not a requirement in years past, and this is Mousseau’s first year speaking at Hopkins. He was an excellent choice for this discussion and I hope he will return to speak to the Class of 2020. The updated sexual misconduct policy for JHU has improved specificity and efficiency at handling a misconduct claim (though this was not addressed in Boyle’s speech either – I had to look up the changes on my own). Nevertheless, we must have a continuous dialogue about this issue that impacts our peers both on-campus and nationwide. ■
Following Mousseau’s speech, Vice Provost Allison Boyle spoke, but her contribution to the discussion largely negated the positive response to Mousseau. While Mousseau had emphasized that individuals in the audience of freshmen could be both the victims and perpetrators of sexual crimes,
Volume XVIII, Issue II • September 8, 2015 •
the JHU POLITIK
5
Baal’s Beheading: How ISIS Annihilates Our History
W
by Darius Mostaghimi ’18, Contributing Writer
hen ISIS is mentioned, many think of the group’s gruesome beheadings, persecution of nonconformists, and unsettling mastery of social media. While the group’s systematic operations rightfully evoke feelings of disgust and empathy for their victims, there is one aspect of its campaign that has proved particularly impactful from a cultural perspective: the continuous destruction of historical structures and monuments. This past Sunday, ISIS detonated explosives inside the Temple of Baal in the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra, erasing the temple from the historic landscape. For two millennia, this temple was cared for and preserved by many different peoples, only to be obliterated by barbaric attack in our supposedly modern, enlightened age. The temple’s detonation makes one question whether these artifacts would be better kept hidden away underground and undiscovered rather than exposed to dangerous men. The evisceration of the Temple of Baal and other historic artifacts represent a humanitarian disaster of an unusual kind—the demolition of our collective heritage. The actions of ISIS matter because our identities are fundamentally shaped by the past. I, like every other citizen of the world, grew up in an environment consisting of people, institutions, buildings, and stories—everything that a society of human beings contains. Included in this human environment is an understanding of the past. We learn from the past, and from it we develop our values, beliefs, and conceptions of self. Societies utilize their histories for the same purposes. What would the United States be without the ideals and legends that came along with the Constitution, the Liberty Bell, or the Old North Church? Humankind has been building upon itself for many thousands of years, each generation becoming a foundation for the next, adding verses to man’s frenzied epic. We all draw upon the past to find meaning in the present and to forge the future. One way we find this meaning is through engaging in the anthropology of the past and by preserving its artifacts. These artifacts are a constant physical reminder of our origins. When ISIS brutalizes these few remaining fragments of our tangible past, they also tear out the pages of mankind’s story.
continued physical presence of the Auschwitz concentration camp, it would be easy to underestimate the tremendous human costs of the Holocaust, to potentially tragic consequences. Over the past two thousand years, curators had taken great care to preserve the Temple of Baal, concomitantly preserving the idea that in the past, historical Middle East societies were tolerant of both monotheistic and polytheistic religions. Only in the modern era have we seen the rise of religious intolerance throughout the Middle East, ISIS being an extreme example. The physical presence of the Temple of Baal was a powerful reminder of religious plurality, which explains why ISIS so hastily destroyed it. ISIS pursues its campaign of destroying certain historical monuments because its leaders understand the power of visual representation. In a perfect “Islamic State”, all heresies and apostasies would have no place. Pragmatically, ISIS leaders realize that these monuments hold inherent power to influence and inspire the future through their impartial reflection of the past. As a result, there is no reason to believe that ISIS will cease destroying monuments in the region. We have an obligation, therefore, not to dismiss the attack by ISIS this past Sunday as simply another tragedy, but to recognize that our grasp on a treasured, irreplaceable heritage has been shaken. We must ensure that it does not slip away. May we recognize that we are the sons and daughters of generations upon generations of mankind, and for every speck of history we lose, we lose a speck of our identity. ■
Without physical remnants of the past, we would have to rely only on authority figures to tell us what happened, a role where personal interest can lead them to be less than truthful. To try to uphold this truth, we, for instance, make it a strong point to ‘never forget’ the atrocities of the Holocaust specifically by opening Auschwitz to the public. We realize that without the
6 the JHU POLITIK
• September 8, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue II
Reflecting on Senator Cardin’s Forum on the Iranian Nuclear Deal
M
by Dylan Etzel ’17, Assistant Editor
aryland Senator Ben Cardin visited JHU last Tuesday to discuss the Iranian nuclear deal with students. Senator Cardin answered questions, including mine, in the hopes of enlightening JHU students and demonstrating his considered approach in deciding whether or not to support the deal. He declared at the outset, “the only goal of this decision is to prevent Iran from ever getting a nuclear weapon.” This ringing statement reminded the audience that signing, or not signing, the agreement both represent paths toward this aim. Now, however, enough senators have announced that they will support the deal, rendering the opposition’s efforts defunct. This returns us to the important question Senator Cardin asked students, “What happens the day after [our decision]?” Any consideration of the ‘day after’ must take into account the ramifications of the agreement for three key relationships: U.S.-Iran relations, US-Saudi relations, and US-Israel relations. With nuclear sanctions lifted, the Iranian economy would gradually return to regional prominence, and Iran may deepen the oil glut with exports. The inflow of money to the Iranian political regime can be channeled in a few ways; war with ISIS, domestic relief, and support for the Syrian Government, the Houthis in Yemen, or other militants are all possibilities. Senator Cardin accepted that funding is destined for each of these three aims. The regime’s choices will suit its political goals, but prioritizing domestic aid over alliances with Shi’a militants could improve US-Iran relations. When asked if Iran was an ally against ISIS, Senator Cardin replied, “Iran is not an ally of the United States of America.” However, his statement was predicated on Iranian sponsorship of militants and domestic political repression. Thus, these three issues stand to change rapidly and significantly inside Iran, and improvements in USIran relations could foster a future alliance against the Islamic State.
society that indicate social progress, Senator Cardin ignored the radical Wahhabi expansion underway. However relations with Saudi Arabia twist, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has signaled that any American relations with Iran represents a dagger in Israel’s back. Yet Israel may indirectly benefit from the deal; if Iran violates its terms, Israel acquires rights of aggression. To prepare for this scenario, the U.S. may potentially bolster aid to Israel. Although the U.S. and Israel need each other in crucial ways, Netanyahu’s actions only further marginalized Israel during the negotiations with Iran. He knows the U.S. cannot pivot away from Israel as easily as it can from Saudi Arabia. However, even Senator Cardin, an American Jew, reminded the audience that Israel was not party to the deal. He agreed somewhat indirectly that U.S.-Israel relations should not serve as sufficient cause to obstruct a deal that could stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Though Israel may emerge unscathed, Netanyahu’s unsuccessful interventions caused U.S.-Israel relations to sour. In answer to Senator Cardin’s question about ‘the day after’, a gradual pivot to Iran, given no violation of the nuclear deal, is likely. U.S.-Iran, U.S.-Saudi, and U.S.-Israel relations have all morphed, but Senator Cardin emphasized that he worries about domestic U.S. political sentiments too. He is concerned that the deal may divide an already polarized American political populace, as a vehemently anti-Iran faction has certainly formed. Despite a few protestations, the Senator deserves our gratitude for engaging JHU students. He declared that even if he votes against the deal, and it passes, he will support the strategy our leaders have chosen. In this philosophy, he exemplified a true American statesman to our students. ■
Saudi Arabia must also wonder if the Iran deal represents a pivot towards a future U.S. friendship with Iran and away from itself. Although the deal hurts U.S.-Saudi relations, Saudi Arabia has little choice but to sell oil to the U.S. Senator Cardin indicated that the US will unwaveringly support Saudi Arabia due to “its human rights progress” and the fact that “[Saudis] don’t sponsor terrorism.” Here, Senator Cardin obscured the facts: Saudi Arabia ideologically aids Salafist militants, such as al Qaeda. In a New York Times Op-Ed last week, Thomas Friedman explained, “Sunni jihadist groups— ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Nusra Front—are the ideological offspring of the Wahhabism injected by Saudi Arabia into mosques and madrasas.” Despite citing valid – albeit small – changes in Saudi
Volume XVIII, Issue II • September 8, 2015 •
the JHU POLITIK
7
The Aftermath of the Anthem Hack: Determining Responsibility in the Digital Age
O
by Haziq Siddiqi ’17, Contributing Writer
n January 27th, an Anthem employee noticed some strange behavior from his account. Upon further investigation, the health insurance company found that hackers had been using the accounts of five employees to steal the personal information of Anthem customers. As events unfolded, Anthem informed the press that it had been the victim of one of the largest security breaches of a healthcare company in history. Over the course of a few months, almost 80 million customers’ personal information had been compromised, including Social Security numbers and birthdates. Not surprisingly, lawsuits quickly followed the announcement of the breach. Within the same week, two victims of the attack, one in Alabama and the other in California, filed lawsuits against Anthem. Susan Morris, the plaintiff from California, pointed out that the compromised data is sufficient to conduct almost any type of identity theft. Because it failed to take sufficient preventative measures, Morris argued, Anthem should be punished for not fulfilling its responsibility to protect its customers’ personal information. These lawsuits pose a broad question about not just the actions of Anthem, but also about the state of health cybersecurity as a whole. Through these cases, we are faced with pressing and murky ethical questions: who should be held responsible for information theft? More specifically, can a company be punished for failing to take sufficient preventative action against security breaches? On the one hand, there is compelling evidence that suggests that Anthem should be held culpable for neglecting to take sufficient preventative measures. Similarly, in an interview with CNN, SANS Institute’s Paul Henry argued that hacks like Anthems’ are frequently the result of neglecting cybersecurity protocols. Indeed, The Wall Street Journal reported that Anthem had made a significant mistake by failing to encrypt customer data. Had Anthem encrypted customers’ information, hackers would have found it much more difficult to steal information even if they entered the company database. Moreover, USA Today reported that Anthem’s decision to place the personal information of these roughly 80 million customers in a single database has been frequently criticized. If information had been split into more databases, no breach would have been this devastating. Through arguments such as these, plaintiffs have raised legitimate complaints about Anthem’s negligence in securing personal information.
which it should be required to pay damages. First, the plaintiffs’ argument about Anthem’s negligence does not hold up to broader considerations. While many have criticized Anthem’s failure to encrypt personal data, others have correctly pointed out that encryption has never been an industry standard. Since the national Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) does not require health information to be encrypted, it is unreasonable to expect Anthem to have encrypted its data. Moreover, there are also compelling defenses of Anthem’s decision to place customer information in a single database. As CEO of Rook Security J.J. Thompson pointed out, single, large databases are common among health care companies, who use such consolidation to simplify data analysis. As such, Anthem’s failure to split customer information into different databases was not its own fault so much as a broader security risk taken by the industry as a whole. Most significantly, the unprecedented nature of the hack also undermines plaintiff arguments that Anthem could have taken preventative measures. In an interview with USA Today David Damato, managing director of the security firm hired to analyze the breach, explained that the virus software used in the hack had not shown up on other companies’ networks. This indicates not only the novelty of the virus, but also the targeted nature of the attack. Because the hackers employed advanced techniques that other companies had not been exposed to, Anthem’s culpability is minimized. In light of the fact that Anthem’s security protocol did not deviate from industry standards, it is unreasonable to specifically punish Anthem. Nevertheless, we must recognize that the plaintiffs have raised compelling criticisms of systematic problems in health information security that must be probed further. Broadly, the Anthem lawsuits illustrate the necessity of rethinking our conception of responsibility and blame in the digital world. ■
However, considering the unique challenges of the digital realm, it is difficult to demonstrate that Anthem made mistakes for
8 the JHU POLITIK
• September 8, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue II
The Looming Inevitable Recession: Why China’s Economic Slowdown Foreshadows the Next Global Recession
I
by Arpan Ghosh ’17, Policy Desk Editor
f the global economic recession of 2008 was a consequence of a failing housing market and sub-prime mortgage crisis in the United States, the next global economic meltdown will most likely be a result of China’s falling currency and depleting stock market. For the first time since the United States began to dominate the global economy, shock waves within the American economy are no longer the only factor it must resist. Chinese economic dominance is now also an increasingly significant factor: over the past decade China was responsible for around 30% of the expansion of the global economy, larger than the hegemony of United States in the previous decade. The way in which China emerged at the forefront of the global economy has not been well described in the media, although Ruchir Sharma of the Wall Street Journal explained it concisely two weeks ago: “The problem is that China’s economic rise of late has been facilitated by a massive and unsustainable stimulus campaign,” the consequence of which is massive debt accumulation. Unfortunately, these stimulus campaigns failed to achieve the intended results: reduction in exports, trade, and output of goods. China’s manufacturing sector has also decelerated to its lowest point in three years, and it is decreasing at a much faster pace than anyone anticipated.
Preventing a global recession in the near future will be impossible: further stock market crashes in the next few months will result from long-term quantitative easing policies in the United States as well as the aforementioned Chinese issues. On top of the lack of economic data from China, the United States Federal Reserve System has been recently thinking of increasing interest rates, which will only result in further U.S. stock market volatility, decrease investor confidence, and compel investors to hold onto their investments. Moreover, there is no way that any country, especially the United States, can grow at a fast enough pace to counter-stabilize China’s slowdown, which means there is a very good chance that the world will experience another global recession as a result of China’s ineffective response. Though China has cut interest rates significantly and massively increased public investment projects, these policies have produced little positive growth. It is imperative that global monetary policy not push economies towards a more severe recession. Though it will be impossible to prevent one, steps can be taken to ensure that the next recession does not repeat the severity of the 2009 crisis. ■
Moreover, many nations are economically dependent on China, and with a lack of Chinese imports and exports, these countries will suffer as well. Brazil, Indonesia, and Japan all rely on trade with China and may experience significant declines in domestic growth. Moreover, structural changes within the Chinese government with the goal of of shifting away from an export economy will cause various issues in preventing a global recession in an environment where many economically strong nations are crucially dependent on Chinese trade. As a result, the “shocking” reduction of China’s currency should not have been so shocking at all. Economists around the world were skeptical of China’s ability to positively respond to stock market crashes and volatility. Moreover, the lack of transparency in China’s economy and the authorities’ manipulation of data make it very difficult for countries or the International Monetary Fund to create or adjust economic policies to ease any economic and market issues. There has been increasing evidence that the Chinese government has manipulated various stock prices over the span of a couple months to create the illusion of market stabilization. In reality, China’s economy is slowing down much faster than the Chinese government would like to admit.
Volume XVIII, Issue II • September 8, 2015 •
the JHU POLITIK
9
WRITE FOR the JHU POLITIK
PHOTO COURTESY: UNITED STATES LIBRARY OF CONGRESS’S PRINTS AND PHOTOGRAPHS DIVISION
JHU Politik, founded in 2008, is a weekly publication of political opinion pieces. We proudly seek to provide the Johns Hopkins community with student voices and perspectives about important issues of our time. Rather than hide within a cloistered academic bubble, we know we must critically engage with the world that surrounds us. That, we believe, is at the heart of what it means to be learning. We are lucky to be situated in the city of Baltimore, a city with a rich history and an ever-changing politics. We aim to look at the politics of the Homewood campus, the city of Baltimore, the domestic landscape of the United States, and the international community . While we publish the Politik weekly, we work simultaneously on our special issues which come out once per semester. These magazines confront a single topic from multiple angles. We have run issues covering topics like the political nature of research, the Arab Spring, and our city Baltimore.
If interested, e-mail us at
JHUPOLITIK@gmail.com Or find us online at
jhupolitik.org
10 the JHU POLITIK
• September 8, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue II