NUPR Fall 2023

WHY IS AMERICA ADDICTED TO WAR? MAYA MELE

CONSERVATISM: THE KEY TO SALVATION? IRENA ZERVAS

We exist amongst a time like no other. In mere months, society has shifted towards a post-pandemic era of technological innovation, political unrest, and a slew of contentious international conflicts. As people adapt to new ways of working, the rise of Generative AI, and the growing marginalization of communities around the globe, students must learn to navigate a landscape that places emphasis on their every move, every turn, and most notably, every word.

The Political Review gives students an outlet to evaluate and communicate these changing dynamics. Words, on their own, hold little power. To truly write is to use words as tools to translate ideas and perspectives grounded in truth. To put something in writing is to present your thoughts for others to carefully review and critique—not with malice, but with the intention of forming new beliefs and contributing to the dissemination of knowledge.

The Political Review stands upon this foundation.

NUPR members and collaborators set the bar for writing, inspiring undergraduate students and other readers to reclaim their perspectives and challenge their pre-existing notions about critical issues. Our columnists, staff writers, editors, and contributors continue to find new topics and theories that drive us forward. The Political Review magazine remains unimpeded by predetermined themes or prescribed articles, opting to provide Northeastern minds full creative control. When left to innovate, our members write from a wide spectrum of interests, from popular culture and campus-based observations to sociopolitical commentary and insights from the world of healthcare.

Our Northeastern-based writers and editors have produced thoughtful and deliberate works to facilitate ideation and growth on and off campus.

Thank you for your passion, patience, and renewed sense of purpose this semester—we’re so honored to present your Fall 2023 magazine!

Anjali Aggarwal Editor-in-Chief

Zoë Goffe President

Zoë Goffe President Anjali Aggarwal Editor-in-Chief Laura Mattingly Creative Director Krishna Prakash Communications Director Alexander Buckley Digital Director Sangya Gupta Treasurer

Jake Egelberg Managing Editor Krishna Prakash Managing Editor Gya Gupta Columns Editor Irena Zervas Columns Editor Margaret Barnes Magazine Editor Jessica Gudin Magazine Editor Hannah Libelo Magazine Editor Kennedy Little Magazine Editor Isabelle Young Magazine Editor Michelle Zhong Magazine Editor

Sean Drew Designer Meagan Ellis Designer Andy He Designer

Founded in 2010, the Northeastern University Political Review seeks to be a non-affiliated platform for students to publish articles and podcasts of the highest possible caliber on contemporary domestic and international politics, as well as critical reviews of political books, film, and events. We aspire to foster a culture of intelligent political discourse, promote awareness of political issues, and provide a forum for students to discuss their views and refine their options.

We hope to reflect the diversity of thought and spirit at Northeastern, including the dual ethic of academic and experiential education our school embodies.

Check out our website at nupoliticalreview.com.

Want to write for NUPR? Email nupreic@gmail.com.

Questions about the club?

Email nupoliticalreview@gmail.com.

Magazines printed by Puritan Capital

PERSPEC TIVES

Scan a QR code with your phone camera to visit the online version of the piece, which includes citations for factual claims. Online versions may differ slightly from print ones.

National

W

eight and health are not synonymous, but many associate weight loss with looking and feeling healthier. This imperfect relationship between weight and health can make maintaining a certain size challenging, and many Americans do not have the time or energy for the lifestyle change required to alter their appearance.

Fad diets offer a fast, low effort weight-loss solution. When diet trends and lifestyle changes feel ineffective, those who can afford it resort to medicine.

Ozempic is a semaglutide injection that reduces blood sugar, particularly for those with type 2 diabetes. Yet, Ozempic’s consumers are largely celebrities interested in its weight loss effects.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that he takes the weekly injection to stay “fit, ripped, and healthy.” In clinical trials, weekly semaglutide injection showed promising results: injections helped participants lose 12% of their body weight in 28 weeks.

However, these trials don’t account for the fact that Ozempic users must take it indefinitely to maintain their results. As

6 — FALL 2023

the Ozempic fad fades away, so will its effects.

DON'T FORGET TO READ THE FINE PRINT! Ozempic is owned by Novo Nordisk, a leading global healthcare company that markets insulin. Novo Nordisk is well aware of those who take weekly Ozempic injections

exclusively for weight loss. However, they evade responsibility for the fad by including, but not highlighting, disclaimers throughout their product labels and advertisements.

Ozempic’s website page contains countless mentions of its effectiveness as a weight loss treatment while also warning users that it is not designed to be a weight loss treatment.

Novo Nordisk strategically avoids losing their weight loss seeking customers by only prohibiting off-label usage of Ozempic.

Ozempic’s manufacturers view this influx of dietenthusiast consumers as a business opportunity. Many of the celebrities that use Ozempic for weight loss are doing so for cosmetic or vanity purposes, while diabetics are primarily interested in its health benefits. By advertising the injection’s effectiveness as a weight loss treatment, Novo Nordisk retains its diabetic customers and exploits its nupoliticalreview.com

National

diet culture customers.

Fueling the fad, a new semaglutide injection recently entered the market under the brand name Wegovy. Though Ozempic and Wevogy contain the same ingredients, Wevogy only advertises its product as a weight loss treatment for chronically obese patients.

Wegovy also requires adults who use it to be clinically overweight.

Wegovy’s retail price is currently around $1,700 per injection, which is more expensive than Ozempic’s $1,200; yet, its manufacturers already faced an injection shortage in 2022.

With Novo Nordisk also reporting a shortage of the pens that administer the injections, the wealthy’s hoarding of Ozempic threatens those who need semaglutide injections the most.

DIABETICS LOSE ACCESS WHILE CELEBS LOSE WEIGHT Celebrities aren’t intentionally hijacking diabetic treatments for personal gain. In fact, many that use semaglutide injections for weight loss are unaware of its primary use.

American comedian Chelsea Handler claimed that her antiaging doctor prescribed Ozempic fairly liberally.

Ozempic was so easy to access that Handler said she was “unaware” she was using the drug at all. While doctors are prescribing celebrities the injection left and right, diabetics across the US are struggling to get refills.

To this day, American diabetics struggle to afford insulin, which must be taken regularly to prevent diabetic ketoacidosis, a condition that starves the body’s cells and destroys body tissue. For some, diabetic ketoacidosis can occur in as early as 24 hours. Type 2 diabetics manage their symptoms through a combination of insulin and other medications like Ozempic.

Pharmaceutical greed from drug manufacturers like Novo Nordisk makes life unaffordable for diabetics— today’s economy makes it impossible for a diabetic to survive. In 2017, medical costs for Americans with diabetes were approximately $9,600 per person. When wealthy celebrities hoard drugs like Ozempic, they remind us that money controls our healthcare system at the expense of our general health and well-being.

ENSURING HEALTHCARE FOR ALL (WHO CAN AFFORD IT) Healthcare facilities have limited resources.

Once the care a person needs exceeds the amount that insurance is willing to cover, funding ultimately determines who receives medical treatment. Because of their wealth, celebrities have greater access to healthcare services and medications.

The United States healthcare system is a business that markets cures for symptoms.

Since those with chronic illnesses like diabetes must take medication regularly, they often become forced into a parasitic relationship with the healthcare system. The Ozempic shortage draws focus to the endless efforts of diabetics to simply survive. Celebrity doctors should take Ozempic’s disclaimers into careful consideration before they prescribe them to patients. By prescribing a diabetes treatment as a weight loss tool, celebrities and their physicians directly limit Ozempic’s accessibility to vulnerable populations.

A truly equitable healthcare system should maintain the accessibility of certain medications by necessity, but unfortunately, having enough money can provide access to exclusive care. And since our healthcare system prioritizes profits over people, life changing medications can become fads with the right price tag and marketing. To dissolve the healthcare business conglomerate and to put more effort into preventative care and health maintenance, we must address and alleviate all cost barriers to healthcare.

Ozempic’s website simultaneously touts its weight-loss benefits and warns that it is not for weight loss. nupoliticalreview.com

FALL 2023 — 7

National

MARY BEIRNE / POLITICS, PHILOSOPHY & ECONOMICS 2025

8 — FALL 2023

that go far beyond a few disgruntled Taylor Swift fans. Ticketmaster is just one example of the influence and power of major corporations in the US, exposing the dangers of allowing even one monopoly to operate within a competitive economy.

enter the market. Ticketmaster’s monopoly over the entertainment business has flown under the radar because of its brand as the most reliable way to buy tickets combined with artists’ reliance on Live Nation to successfully promote their shows.

It wasn’t until the unprecedented demand HOW TICKETMASTER BECAME for Taylor Swift tickets that people took issue A MONOPOLY with Ticketmaster. During the Senate hearing, Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino tried In 1980, Congress passed the Sherman Anti- to shift the blame from their own shortcomtrust Act to prevent companies from forming ings to scalpers—people who resell tickets monopolies and promote economic competi- on StubHub for significantly higher prices. tion. When companies control markets, buy- Rapino stated that the genuine ticket selling ers suffer from an inefficient allocation of business has “never been more competitive,” resources, leading to higher prices and lower and that every venue they book has multiple production. However, the Sherman Antitrust offers from other reputable companies.

Act is not an infallible method for preventing But the reality is that Ticketmaster’s repmonopolies; utation, cultivatback in 2010, ed through its Live Nation merger with Live Entertainment Nation, has enSimply put, Ticketmaster merged with sured the loyalty is a monopoly, whose influTicketmaster of artists seeking to control over to promote their ence could have have conse70 percent of music and conquences that go far beyond the ticket-sellcerts. As a part of a few disgruntled Taylor ing business. the Senate hearThe Obama ing, proponents Swift fans.

Administraof Ticketmastion approved ter emphasized the merger, that artists can claiming it followed the regulations stipu- choose their ticket-selling outlet, but Live lated within Sherman Antitrust Act, which Nation is “so powerful it doesn’t need to exert prohibits Ticketmaster and Live Nation from pressure…people just fall in line,” according restricting competition through rigged bids or to Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. exclusive contracts with venues.

On top of this, Ticketmaster itself makes However, Ticketmaster and Live Nation it challenging to buy tickets by charging exorhave violated these provisions for over a bitant fees that, in some cases, nearly double decade. Since the merger, Live Nation has starting prices. Ticketmaster’s website claims threatened to prevent artists from playing at that these fees “[cover] the cost of technology, venues that do not use Ticketmaster, making people, and resources needed to provide a it near-impossible for other competitors to safe and secure ticket-buying experience.”

“

“

“I

’m the problem. It’s me.” Taylor Swift sang this lyric from her hit song “Anti-hero” in stadiums of tens of thousands of people. The lyric even made its way to US legislators, with Senators using “Anti-hero” to describe the top ticket-selling website, Ticketmaster.

Taylor Swift’s “The Eras Tour” is on its way to being the highest grossing tour of all time, predicted to generate gross revenues of 1.4 billion dollars by the tour’s end in 2024. Yet, many fans struggled to access tickets on Ticketmaster—the official vendor for almost all of Swift’s shows—and faced outrageous prices for resold tickets on other platforms like StubHub or SeatGeek.

The outcry from “Swifties” during the tour’s ticket sales back in November 2022 caught the attention of the US Senate, who held a hearing to investigate the lack of competition in the ticket-selling industry that led to these dramatic price hikes.

The hearing uncovered some startling facts.

The four-hour long, bipartisan investigation heard from witnesses such as the CEO of SeatGeek, Jack Groetzinger, who claimed that Ticketmaster harms his profits. He went on to say that many venues prefer SeakGeek’s secure purchasing technology, but ultimately cannot use it out of fear of retaliation from Ticketmaster. While Ticketmaster notes these as false allegations, a 2019 Department of Justice investigation revealed that the company undercut competing ticket-selling websites through Live Nation Entertainment, which is not only Ticketmaster’s parent company, but also a promoting company used by over 2,000 artists. If venues refused to work only with Ticketmaster, Live Nation would refuse to host shows at their locations, costing them artists, and therefore, revenue.

Simply put, Ticketmaster is a monopoly, whose influence could have consequences

nupoliticalreview.com

National

However, many users began to challenge this claim after losing Taylor Swift tickets in a cybersecurity breach that allowed numerous bots to infiltrate the website and illegally obtain tickets in bulk, avoiding Ticketmaster’s additional fees.

Ticketmaster, Amazon benefits from the US’ ineffective antitrust laws.

As a part of the Senate hearing, legislators proposed multiple solutions to enforce antitrust laws inside and outside the scope of Ticketmaster. For instance, to prevent monopolies from dominating markets, reforms THE FUTURE OF CORPORAcould prohibit contracts between venues and TIONS AS WE KNOW IT ticketing agents and place price caps on upcharged products.

The issue of monopolization extends beyond However, these ideas have not yet turned a single concert or conglomerate. The Biden into policies. We have not seen improvement Administration has dedicated the better half on the ticket-buying front, and fans continue of his term to promoting economic competi- to struggle under excessive price conditions. tion. The Ticketmaster Senate hearing led to Just recently, pop artist Olivia Rodrigo regreater discourse about monopolization and leased tickets for her world tour on Ticketmasbipartisan agreement among legislators to ter. Fans once again felt the repercussions of call upon the Dethe ticket mopartment of Jusnopoly, being tice to investigate kicked out of the effectiveness queues and reTicketmaster and Live Naof our existing anceiving outration Violated the Sherman titrust laws. geously overTicketmaster priced tickets.

Antitrust Act and dominatand Live Nation This is a cyed the live entertainment violated the Shercle that will man Antitrust Act continue unindustry for years without and dominated less the US any pushback. the live entertaingovernment ment industry for enforces anyears without any titrust regulapushback, implytions. The Deing that there are other monopolies that oper- partment of Justice must take the growing ate with little to no government surveillance. power of monopolies seriously and enact real Take Amazon for example. change, not just to repair the ticket-selling inBack in September 2023, the Federal Trade dustry, but to prevent incidents like this from Commission (FTC) sued Amazon for illegally happening in the future. implementing monopolistic practices, arguing that Amazon’s low prices and fast deliveries have prevented existing companies from growing and new ones from emerging.

Few products cannot be found on Amazon and delivered to your door in less than 24 hours. Amazon makes it nearly impossible for other, smaller businesses to compete, as consumers are drawn towards its convenience and accessibility. Additionally, Amazon has absorbed nearly two million smaller brands, enticing them with profits that are hard to resist. This tactic alone has helped Amazon take up to 45 percent of the profits from these smaller brands and maintain market control. Aside from other major superstores like Walmart or Target—who don’t meet Amazon’s level of convenience—there is little competition that threatens Amazon’s sales. Like

nupoliticalreview.com nupoliticalreview.com

“

“

FALL 2023 — 9

Global

Krishnamitra Prakash / Political Science & International Affairs 2024

INTRODUCTION TO AI

MEDICAL APPLICATIONS OF AI

n the era of machine-learning and artificial intelligence (AI), many question the ethics and efficiency of integrating AI in all sectors of society. Society both vilifies and lauds AI for the problems and solutions it poses for the future of human security, with some critics forecasting “the end of modern society as we know it.”

Regardless of one’s stance on the subject, there is little doubt that AI holds enormous potential to spur a technological, economic, and social revolution—for better or for worse.

AI already aids public health professionals with medical diagnostics, monitoring the spread of infectious disease, and optimizing patient treatment pathways.

To realize the potential of AI, one must hold a basic understanding of its core components: machine learning, deep learning, and neural networks.

Machine learning, broadly, is the ability for a computer to independently identify patterns and make predictions using a given dataset. Neural networks and deep learning are subcategories of machine learning. The former refers to a set of algorithms that mimic the human brain to analyze and make conclusions about data, while the latter combines three or more neural networks in its decision-making for improved accuracy.

The use of AI in medical diagnostics is particularly important in radiomics, which pinpoints key elements within medical images.

Oncological diagnostics often rely on researchers and computer-aided tools to identify potentially cancerous

I

“ 10 — FALL 2023

“

lesions. AI’s growing capabilities promise greater diagnostic accuracy than previous generations of computer-aided detection.

Advanced algorithms are on par with or better than experienced radiologists in recognizing disease, pointing toward a brighter future for physicians and patients alike.

AI can also help with disease prevention by monitoring infectious disease outbreaks.

Because traditional health surveillance methods rely on statistical methods, they generally predict patterns for large populations.

Meanwhile, AI uses advanced algorithms to account for fluctuating socioeconomic and environmental dynamics, generating accurate predictions for local communities. Public health professionals, for example, used AI to anticipate and minimize the impact of mosquito-borne illnesses in African communities, such as viral encephalitis, the Zika virus, the West Nile virus, dengue, malaria, yellow fever, and chikungunya.

It should be noted that in these case studies, AI-led machinery is not fully autonomous and requires human intervention to transmit data, interpret findings, and make final decisions on patient care.

However, many AI-led technologies are growing too sophisticated for their users to understand; patients may not have enough awareness to provide informed consent. As nupoliticalreview.com

Global

such, officials must reconsider how AI changes the existing principles of patients' rights.

EXISTING LIMITATIONS The European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) maintains that physicians must request consent for digital data collection using “clear and plain language” and data subjects must consent in a “freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous” manner.

For many AI-led treatment plans, datasets contain sensitive information about genetic predispositions and family history, while physicians face the challenge of clearly explaining how an algorithm will use a patient’s medical information to produce a diagnosis or treatment plan.

However, certain AI models use black box algorithms that prevent anyone from seeing how each algorithm produces a result. There is no legal framework that requires physicians to disclose that they cannot fully interpret the reasoning or process behind AI’s diagnoses, effectively leaving patients in the dark.

Those familiar with AI have also long criticized the technology for racial discrimination.

Physicians and underserved patients in vulnerable areas may lack access to information sharing platforms, which create a lack of datasets that can be utilized by AI to make accurate predictions. These gaps in data can cause AI to miss diseases or health risks in patients.

Another key issue with global AI integration lies in how nations diverge in their trust of emerging technologies. Leaders from Africa and Latin America present at the World

Trade Organization (WTO) have expressed concern with AI implementation on three major fronts: reduced job availability, the exploitation and destruction of local companies by international technology giants, and the lack of advanced infrastructure in the developing world.

These observations illustrate the inequalities that AI may exacerbate internationally; future summits on technological innovation must consider the differing environments states face.

EXISTING GOVERNANCE ISSUES TO CONSIDER To this end, global governance is needed to facilitate the involvement of international governmental organizations (IGOs) in promoting sustainable plans for AI’s integration in healthcare.

The first of these frameworks must contend with the evolution of patients’ rights and physician responsibilities.

The European Commission's Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA) of 2021 is currently one of the most advanced international frameworks for regulating AI use.

The AIA largely functions via systematic registration of all European AI-led machinery in a database. Technologies deemed by the commission to

“ “ nupoliticalreview.com

AND

be more at risk for misuse or biased measurements require stricter regulations and the presence of human intervention.

The AIA also requires professionals to demonstrate proficiency in understanding AI components and processes as a prerequisite for use. However, there is still widespread support for codifying patients’ rights in the AIA. Human rights organizations have criticized the AIA for lacking a “human-centered approach.” Advocates encourage legislators to reframe digital rights as fundamental human rights, ensuring that matters of dignity and consent remain at

Global

the forefront of all future AI-related negotiations. Once the European Commission sufficiently expands these regulations, the AIA may become the global touchstone of future regulatory frameworks.

The world also needs a legal framework to mitigate other risks of AI implementation.

These risks include the loss of diagnostic clarity for patients, data misuse, and systemic algorithmic biases, ideas that align with the codification of patient rights in the digital age.

There have been several attempts to detail digital rights and responsibilities, such as the 2019 Ethics Guidelines published by the European Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on AI (AI HLEG).

The AI HLEG maintains that AI systems should not undermine human autonomy, and urges developers to clearly explain the intentions and constraints of algorithms. Moreover, the AI HLEG calls for careful monitoring of AI systems wherever they are in use; if an AI system is found to negatively impact the well-being of individuals, societies, democracies, or environments, it must be barred entirely from use.

The Spanish Charter of Digital Rights also touches on this subject and ensures their citizens’ right to appeal AI-based decisions.

Additionally, under the Spanish framework, information sharing with third parties cannot occur without express consent from clients or patients. By protecting civilians and

12 — FALL 2023

promoting technological innovation, the 2019 Ethics Guidelines and Spanish Charter of Digital Rights provide a thorough foundation from which further international negotiations must sprout.

As of July 2022, the WHO and International D i g i t a l Health and AI Research Collaborative (I-DAIR) have signed a joint memorandum outlining an agreement to “harness the digital health revolution” for urgent public health matters. Consequently, individual member states can work in conjunction with WHO standards to sustainably implement AI technologies while receiving needed guidance from the international order.

This initiative rightly recognizes the variance in state needs, obligations, and capabilities while laying a strong foundation for a robust legal tool. Further international collaboration is needed to ensure that data biases do not lead to adverse patient outcomes via utilizing diverse datasets and upholding patient digital rights.

AI possesses tremendous potential to revolutionize global healthcare systems.

“

“

But, there is still much work that needs to be done to ensure that algorithmic errors and inaccessibility do not hinder the global implementation of advanced technologies.

These qualms once again emphasize the need for a legally-binding framework that states can use to promote information sharing and secure privacy for civilians. Most fortunately, there exists a global will within prominent international governmental organizations to ascertain specific conditions from which further negotiations can be built. For the future of states, physicians, and patients to be bright, the penchant for change and global goodwill must shine down upon it.

nupoliticalreview.com

Perspectives

ANJALI AGGARWAL / ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 2025

A

mericans love Paris. We envision a fictional version of the city where life is full of cafes, croissants, and a certain je ne sais quoi. We idealize their style, food, and liberated concept of romance. Netflix’s hit sit-com, Emily in Paris, encapsulates our infatuation not only with France’s popular culture, but with its working culture too. The show follows Emily’s life as an American marketing executive working abroad and highlights our envy of societies with healthier work-life balances.

Emily in Paris’s protagonist (Emily) struggles to adjust to life in France. She doesn’t speak French, she doesn’t know anyone, and she doesn’t adapt to French social norms. Yet, she immediately excels at her new job, and to the annoyance of her co-workers, attributes her success to her American work ethic.

Despite Emily’s apparent patriotism, she ultimately prefers work in Paris. Emily is one of many US workers facing burnout who settle in countries with stronger labor laws. As told

by Luc, Emily’s co-worker, Americans “live to work” while the French “work to live.”

nupoliticalreview.com

“

Emily embodies the traditional view of the typical American worker: meritocratic, hardworking, driven (sometimes to a fault). But working nonstop is not sustainable, not for Emily nor other like-minded US employees who overwork themselves in the name of the American dream.

“

FALL 2023 — 13

Perspectives

LIVING TO WORK One of Emily’s main challenges throughout the show is her inability to maintain a healthy work-life balance. She works overtime on vacations and on weekends and pesters her coworkers to do the same. Emily embodies the traditional view of the typical American worker: meritocratic, hardworking, driven (sometimes to a fault). But working nonstop is not sustainable, not for Emily nor other likeminded US employees who overwork them-

“

employees. Companies that demand one hundred percent of their employees push workers to reach beyond their work-life boundaries.

The number of American expatriates (expats) continues to rise. In 1999, there were 4.1 million US expats living abroad. That approximation has since doubled. Media like Emily in Paris visualize the appeal that becoming an expat has to offer for US citizens frustrated with their surroundings.

Northeastern’s career-oriented environment reflects the United States’ hustle culture

The existing United States’ work culture creates a sense of hostility between employers and employees.

Companies that demand one hundred percent of their employees push workers to reach beyond their work-life boundaries.

selves in the name of the American dream.

Many US workers suffer from burnout, which contributed to the Great Resignation: a post-pandemic workforce phenomenon characterized by employee demoralization and mass exits. With the Great Resignation came quiet quitting: employees fulfilling the bare minimum of their responsibilities.

Quiet quitting allows employees to have a life outside of work, which can prevent burnout and cultivate stronger working relationships.

Some Americans claim that quiet quitting is selfish, reducing performance and engagement for teams, departments, and entire companies. And, although quiet quitting pushes Americans to allocate more time for themselves, it can alleviate the resentment that people feel towards their work, improving long-term engagement and satisfaction. The existing United States’ work culture creates a sense of hostility between employers and

14 — FALL 2023

“

“

depicted by Emily in Paris. Niche, a popular college review site, reports that most student respondents would describe the average Northeastern student as “ambitious.”

As Northeastern opens international campuses and creates summer programs around the world, more and more students are getting a taste of what other working cultures are like.

According to Kristine Aleksandrovica, a fifth-year student at Northeastern who has completed co-ops in Boston and Paris, the Parisian working environment is more relaxed. At her workplace, employees would arrive late and take hour-long smoke breaks on top of their hour-long lunch breaks. In Paris, she felt like she was working to live; work was also a social commitment where people valued their peers more than their individual responsibilities.

Emily in Paris depicts an environment where locals collectively accommodate Emily by speaking English. However, Aleksandrovica, noted that most French citizens she came across were aloof towards Englishspeakers. She says that simply trying to learn French makes people more willing to listen to you, even if it’s not flawless.

Viewers should consider this before deciding to follow in Emily’s footsteps.

Working harder and not smarter, America sacrifices employee wellbeing in exchange for similar, and sometimes lower, economic gains.

“

nupoliticalreview.com

Perspectives

WORKING TO LIVE Emily’s Parisian coworkers maintain clear work-life boundaries, reflecting France’s labor laws which protect employees’ personal lives. Watching the show, American audiences might be surprised to learn that it’s illegal to work on weekends in France. In 2017, France passed a law prohibiting employers from contacting employees outside of regular work hours in an attempt to preserve their Right to Disconnect, a policy soon followed

by Italy and Spain. French laws also prevent employees from working more than 10 hours per day, establish higher minimum wages and consider a work week to be 35 hours.

These philosophies are shared across much of Europe. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is an international organization of 38 member states that account for 80% of global trade. The US is the only OECD economy that doesn’t mandate paid parental leave or require lunch breaks, earning it the moniker: “No-Vacation Nation.” Despite working for

“

shorter hours, European nations maintain With Americans feeling drawn to working similar levels of worker productivity. Working conditions abroad, US lawmakers should take harder and not smarter, America sacrifices notice. To prevent the burnout and migration employee well-being in exchange for similar, of skilled workers, we must implement stronand sometimes lower, economic gains. ger labor policies and treat people like While media like Emily in Paris can leave human beings instead of human capAmericans viewing European countries ital. American expats influenced by through rose-colored glasses, workers the media’s portrayal of European there don’t live in a utopia. As of 2022, one countries will be caught off guard in three Europeans is considering quitif they think that living in France ting their jobs, pointing to inadequate is as glamorous as in Emily in compensation and insufficient career Paris, but what it gets advancement. In Paris, thousands of right about the protests—both violent and non-violent— work place is that responded to the French government’s we shouldn’t be pension bill that raised the retirement living to work. age from 62 to 64. This doesn’t detract We should work from the value of more proto live. tective labor laws, but rather signifies that Americans shouldn’t flee to France in search of perfection. Instead, we should learn from worker needs globally and focus on improving working conditions domestically.

While media like Emily in Paris can leave Americans viewing European countries through rose-colored glasses, workers there don’t live in a utopia.

nupoliticalreview.com

“

FALL 2023 — 15

Featured

MAYA MELE / INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS & POLITICAL SCIENCE 2026

P

rior to becoming the world's most prosperous nation, second largest trade exporter, and greatest influencer, the United States was an array of minor territories clinging to the solitary North American coast.

One tactic propelled this vulnerable, shattered mosaic of a nation to one of today’s world leaders: war. War is American history’s blood and bones, and its brutality still echoes across the globe. Centuries of conquests, all for the sake of wealth.

WAR BUILT AMERICA Conflicts like the Mexican–American War and the Korean War aided in the state's aims of increasing territorial gain, nationalistic pride, and involvement in international affairs.

These conflicts ushered in the development of novel foreign relations and allowed countries like South Korea to become a democratic ally of the United States. However, these gains costed the price of the widespread massacring, torturing, and raping of innocent civilians.

In the Mexican-American war, American soldiers killed over 4,000 civilians. In the Korean War, the American military slaughtered 10 percent of Korea’s total civilian population and committed over 1,800 acts of torture, including forced starvation, beatings, rape, and forced marches.

“

WE DID IT FOR MONEY The US government tries to hide from its bloody past, but its motivation for causing so much death and destruction is as simple as it is shameful: money.

Through the Mexican-American War, the

16 — FALL 2023

United States adopted over 100,000 Mexicans as US citizens and used these migrants to build its western frontier. At the same time, US investors poured money into Mexican railroads, mines, and export industries like petroleum, which produced massive profits.

The Korean War opened up Asia to American investment and many economists argue that it increased the US’s involvement in global affairs generally. The Korean War also spurred a sharp increase in consumer expen-

As a Ukrainian, I am overjoyed by the fact that the US is aiding my family's home country; however, this is not done out of the virtue of an American’s heart.

Although America’s more modern efforts to prevent war in the Middle East and aid nations such as Ukraine and Syria appear good-natured, their true intentions don’t solely encompass humanitarian concerns.

America allegedly began its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to counter terrorism in the region. In reality, they were a strategy to feed American corporations, which reaped millions by exploiting mineral deposits and oil reserves.

US foreign aid to Syria provides the US with another source of oil. Meanwhile, US intervention in Libya stabilized its economy, which provided a new market for exports from the United States.

As a Ukrainian, I am overjoyed by the fact that the US is aiding my family's home country; however, this is not done out of the virtue of an American’s heart. The US economy benefits enormously from its involvement in conflicts throughout Eastern Europe—including Ukraine—by attracting global capital flows, and disrupting bilateral trade between Russia and the E.U.

“

diture, contributing to rapid gross domestic product (GDP) growth.

US foreign policy has consistently exploited the relationship between war and economic growth; war requires the US to spend money on its military, and government spending is a large component of GDP. War also spurs industrial production and employment, further contributing to GDP growth.

nupoliticalreview.com

Featured

WAR IS A BUSINESS, NOT A GAME

“

With regard to national security, the United States engages in conflict with regions that do not threaten American citizens at all.

Despite the unfathomable wealth that America owes to war, some argue that America pursues warfare to sustain humanitarian rights or to promote national security.

But, if the United States truly cared about maintaining humanitarian conditions, then we would commit to these conflicts by offering further support. The US has refused to fully involve itself in other nations’ disputes. In Yemen, for instance, although the Biden administration declared it would no longer support Saudi Arabia's military intervention, the US still maintains a position in the war by defending the Saudis against threats. Considering that Saudi Arabia holds the world's second-largest oil reserves, America's position on the war is not particularly surprising.

In addition, the US has shown no interest nupoliticalreview.com

in offering support to numerous other humanitarian crises, such as the Uighur genocide in China, the ongoing conflict in Ethiopia, and the persistent political unrest transpiring in Somalia between the nations central government and al-Shabaab.

With regard to national security, the United States engages in conflict with regions that do not threaten American citizens at all.

In the Black Hills War of 1876 , the US government attacked Native American tribes living on the Western frontier. US soldiers killed 265 Native Americans in the conflict.

Likewise, US involvement in the Iraq War

“

was because of our desire for oil, not because Iraq posed a direct threat to US power.

WAR SHOULD BE FOR PEOPLE, NOT FOR POWER The United States seems like it will persist in declaring war as a lucrative business until the end of time. However, despite this apparent perpetual ardor, we must acknowledge that obtaining capital primarily through war is far too bloody.

We should call on our government to only engage in conflict when it is necessary, and to respect all peoples’ human rights, rather than to rely on war as a means of enrichment.

FALL 2023 — 17

National

Irena Zervas / International Affairs and History 2026

I

t’s no secret that Conservatism and Christianity in the United States are two sides of the same coin. The Republican party preaches Christian family values, and Republican voters elect congressperson after congressperson to carry those Christian values into office. Only 3 percent of Conservatives don’t believe in God, and 78 percent are certain of their belief in God. While the United States was intended to be a secular nation, when Dwight Eisenhower added the term “under God'' into the Pledge of Allegiance and coined “in God we trust” as the United States’ official motto he faced little backlash. At the time, over 90 percent of the adult population at the time was Christian.

As time has gone on, societal views have progressed, but the Conservative party continues to play into this outdated Christian rhetoric.

PRESERVING THE PAST In the second half of the 20th century, most people didn’t mind that religion and politics were intertwined. However, Christianity has shrunk in popularity over time. For many Christians, this is more than just an unfortunate circumstance—it’s a threat to their country.

Much to their dismay, Christian Conservatives from older generations have seen rights for marginalized groups grow dramatically. Women now outnumber men in the college-educated labor force and the percentage of women in the workforce has almost

18 — FALL 2023

As the values they’ve grown up with rapidly decline, people from the older generation feel as though they have to save Christianity in their country to preserve its moral integrity.

doubled since 1950. In 1996, the Clinton administration signed the Defense of Marriage Act, defining marriage as an entity solely between one man and one woman. Twelve years later, Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage, and legislators enshrined this right nationwide in 2015. The same year, two million people attended New York City Pride. In 2019, attendees doubled.

Conservative values today provide a safe haven for older Christians who are unwilling to accept new aspects of American society.

As the values they’ve grown up with rapidly decline, people from the older generation feel as though they have to save Christianity in their country to preserve its moral integrity. It’s reasonable to understand why older Christian Conservatives find solace in their religion: it’s the only place that continues to reinforce the societal ideals that they grew up with.

Christian Conservatives advocate heavily for “traditional family values.” While much of our society begins to stray away from the ideas that marriage should be between one man and one woman, that men should be the providers, and that a woman’s purpose is to have children, many Christian Conservatives still hold these ideas near and dear to their hearts. Under the umbrella of family values, Conservative leaders have built an empire of divisive political issues, from combatting gay marriage to denying transgender people’s right to use their bathroom of choice. nupoliticalreview.com

National

In 2022, Florida passed the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill, and many other states proposed similar legislation. These types of laws, which prevent LGBTQ+ children from expressing their identity and enable anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination in schools, gained Florida governor Ron DeSantis national attention among Conservatives. At a speech at Hillsdale College, DeSantis advised students to “put on the full armor of God'' to “stand firm against the left’s schemes.”

Christian Conservatives strongly support the campaign of anti-wokeness that DeSantis has promoted. In the 2022 election, DeSantis won 60 percent of votes in Florida, and Conservatives are replicating his policies nation-wide. Advocacy for anti-LGBTQ+ legislation has brought DeSantis incredible popularity, demonstrating the importance of these issues to Conservatives.

REPUBLICAN HYPOCRISY Republicans are supposedly the party of Christianity; yet, they’re the party against welfare and the party against gun control.

This is true even though the Bible clearly emphasizes giving to those in need and that it is a sin to murder. While Conservatives might argue that charities are more effective than welfare, the reality is that welfare is crucial to providing social insurance for those in need, and prevents philanthropic particularism, which means that those in need are able to get help based on what they need instead of getting what charities might want to give. Additionally, the Conservative push against gun control contradicts their dedication to Christian family values, considering that gun violence is the leading cause of death among teens and children in the United States. There’s no clear way to fix the hypocrisy that exists within Conservative Christian ideology; however, we can examine its causes.

Ironically, the ideas behind “traditional family values” have only minor biblical origins. However, by creating a mold for the traditional person and family, Christians inevitably force some people to fall outside of this mold. In many sects of Christianity, there is an “us versus them” mentality, where everyone who is not “saved” by Christianity is immoral, or at least morally inferior. While these Christians might care about pacifism or generosity, these personal values do not directly influence society as a whole. Conservatism allows for Christians to set aside the psychological difficulties of separating politics and religion.

Over half of all Conservatives are Protestant, with most of these people falling under Evangelical religions. Evangelical Christianity differs from other Christian sects because it emphasizes converting others and accepting salvation. For Evangelicals, salvation is the nupoliticalreview.com

FALL 2023 — 19

Featured

only path towards eternal happiness for both themselves and those around them. All sects of Christianity believe that they must follow the word of God and live life without sin to be saved, but what makes Evangelicals especially susceptible to Conservative ideology is its emphasis on the idea that the Bible was created without flaws. Evangelicals rely on the Bible’s interpretations of marriage, gender, and sexuality literally and without context. Because of this, Evangelicals identify heavily with the traditional ideals promoted by Conservatives.

The “us versus them” mentality causes most Christians—Evangelicals included—to deem anyone who does not participate to be unsaved and inferior in the eyes of God. This mentality translates especially unfavorably into politics because no one, religious or not, would support a party that they felt was morally inept.

The question then becomes: is compromise with Christians in politics even possible? This seems like it would be an easy question, con-

20 — FALL 2023

The “us versus them” mentality causes most Christians—Evangelicals included—to deem anyone who does not participate to be unsaved and inferior in the eyes of God.

sidering that the United States is secular in its founding. However religion is more than just a weekly activity for the people who participate in it. For these people, religion serves as a compass for decision making that roots deep into their values. The issue, though, is not that religious people are involved in politics, rather that religion is manipulated for

political gain.

Realistically speaking, fixing this issue would take an intense overhaul of our political system, media system, and most of the churches in the United States. Churches, as well as politicians, benefit from the rhetoric that the Conservative party promotes. The media, who also profits from this ideology, only exacerbates the issue. When such a threat is being perpetuated by peoples’ churches, which they deeply trust, their politicians, who they voluntarily elect, and their media, which they consume daily, it is unlikely that anyone will see or care about the manipulation brought about by these entities.

Ultimately, all we can do is thoroughly examine the power structures in our own lives to understand what they gain from our beliefs.

While the church and Conservative politicians serve as an example of this trap of ideological manipulation, all entities in positions of power seek to gain something, and we must keep this in mind to understand our own views and their relevance in our lives.

nupoliticalreview.com

National

K

amala Harris broke countless boundaries as the first woman—and person of Black and Indian heritage—to become vice president of the United States.

Her approval ratings, however, do not match the expected enthusiasm for the gravity of her accomplishment.

Almost immediately after her inauguration in January 2021, Harris’s approval ratings began to decline. Five months later, the unfavorable opinions surpassed the favorable ones. As of December 2022, a majority of registered voters, 54 percent, had an unfavorable opinion of her, leaving her with a net rating of minus 15 percentage points.

During this point in their respective terms, the previous four vice presidents, all of whom are white men, had higher net ratings than Harris.

This could be the result of a more politically polarized nation, where it is increasingly difficult for politicians to garner extensive support from voters, but the striking gap between Pence and Harris of 15 percentage points is much wider than the 2.7 percentage point gap between Biden and Pence. This significant difference in approval ratings points to larger differences between the previous vice presidents and Harris that stem beyond politics.

Harris is a woman of color who was born to a Jamaican father and Indian mother.

Because of her racial and gender identity, Harris took the title of “first” throughout her career. She is the first woman, Black person, and South Asian person elected to be San Francisco district attorney, California

GYA GUPTA / JOURNALISM AND SCREEN STUDIES 2025

nupoliticalreview.com

attorney general, and now, vice president.

The media coverage surrounding Harris reflects the novelty of her position. A report generated by TIME’S UP found that 61 percent of the media coverage of Harris mentioned race or gender, compared to just 5 percent of coverage for former vice president Mike Pence. A quarter of this reporting employed sexist and racist stereotypes, such as the “Angry Black Women” trope.

The misogyny and racism that is targeted towards Harris reflects a white and male dominated political system. Harris does not fall into the stereotypes connected with her identity, which harms her image. Whether it is conscious or not, Americans expect

both the Black community and the Indian American community.

CHITTHIS VS. AUNTIES

Indian American comedian Hasan Minhaj voiced his community’s perspective on Harris when he joked on the Tonight Show that Harris “manages to do what every Indian dude wishes they can do: be Black.”

Indian Americans may feel as though Harris appeals to her Black heritage more than her South Asian roots, often dismissing her Indian heritage entirely. Many of the criticisms that voters and mainstream news media launch at Harris involve accusations of either not being “Black enough” or “South Asian enough.”

I n d i a n American voters seem to dislike the obscurity with which she presents her heritage, as some Americans are unaware of her South Asian background entirely. Harris has not yet made any major efforts Harris to adhere to her stereotypes, and to appeal towards the Indian American are disappointed when she does not. Thus, community. Although the Biden-Harris Harris seemingly fails to garner support from administration held “chai and chat” events and created a South Asians for Biden group, these efforts were not extensively covered in mainstream media.

However, Harris captured the attention of Indian Americans and news media alike when she spoke Tamil during her speech at the Democratic National Convention. While speaking about her family, Harris used the Tamil word “chitthis,” which translates to “aunties.” This moment caught the attention of major news organizations both in the United States and India. Headlines referencMEDIA ing “my chitthis” went viral on social media and caught the attention of Indian American influencers. This expression of Indian identity on a national stage resonated well with the Indian American electorate, as opposed to manufactured, inauthentic appeals.

Although ancestry is an important topic for voters, the 36 percent of Harris’s media coverage that focused on her racial background overshadowed her stance as a politician and her professional achievements.

Black voters tend to see beyond Harris’s race and ancestry, and focus on her policies related to police brutality and drug abuse.

“

Because of her racial and gender identity, Harris took the title of “first” throughout her career. She is the first woman, Black person, and South Asian person elected to be San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general, and now, vice president.

“

FALL 2023 — 21

National

THE PROGRESSIVE PROSECUTOR AND BLACK LIVES MATTER

towards minority groups.

Biden? More Democrats Are Making the Case” Harris’s past as a prosecutor may contrib- reflect the public push that helped lead to ute to her failure with the Black electorate. In Harris’s appointment. a New York Times opinion piece, law profesBlack voters hoped that Harris would Harris grew up in Oakland, California in the sor Lara Bazelon argues that Harris opposed bring change and address these racial 1960s, where a fourth of the total residents progressive criminal justice reforms during issues, but she was not the activist that the were Black, and only 0.3 percent were of her time as California attorney general. Even news media asserted a Black female vice Indian descent. Because of the demograph- when she held office as the San Francisco dis- president would be. trict attorney, Harris Top issues amongst the demographic was known to be were tackling police brutality, white supremtough on crime rather acy, and drug policy, many of which Harris than a reformer. took a regressive stance on earlier in her In 2013, Harris political career. She did not stray away from responded to protest- traditional Democratic attitudes and place ers of mass incarcer- activism at the forefront of her actions, as ation during a policy Black activists wanted her too, nor did she talk. She claimed to make compelling strides to crack down on support their ideas in social inequity. theory, but stated that During her time as a California senator, fewer jails and more however, Harris worked on policies that schools would not would uplift the Black community, but absolve crime in the these accomplishments did not receive city. This video circu- significant media coverage. She introduced ics in her hometown, Harris was always lated on Twitter and caught the attention of the Justice in Policing Act of 2020, which perceived as a Black woman. Historically, Black activists in 2019. aimed to reform policing and reduce racial biracial Americans with Black roots are After George Floyd’s murder in 2020, discrimination. This action did not gain forced to pick one racial identity over the news media sources increasingly empha- nearly as much media traction, resulting in other instead of identifying as mixed race. sized Biden’s need to choose a Black woman a skewed view of Harris’s stance on police Even though some critics say Harris as his running chose her Black identity, it does not seem as mate.

Headlines though Black voters have chosen her. “Black that came out candidates make one primary mistake: throughout the They assume that they’re going to have the month following Black vote just because they’re Black,” said the murder evoked Johnnie Cordero, chair of the South Carolina a similar sentiDemocratic Black Caucus in an interview ment.

Politico’s with Politico.

“Minneapolis Black voters are skeptical of her policy unrest shakes up choices, which are often in the center of VP shortlist” and the political spectrum and tough on crime. The New York Neither Indian American nor Black voters Times’ “A Black seem fully convinced of Harris’s dedication Vice President for

“

Although ancestry is an important topic for voters, the 36 percent of Harris’s media coverage that focused on her racial background overshadowed her stance as a politician and her professional achievements.

“

“

22 — FALL 2023

Granting essential workers citizenship could be the catalyst France needs to improve attitudes toward immigration and foster a lasting environment for positive policy changes for all immigrants.

“

nupoliticalreview.com

National

“

reform and mass incarceration. This legislation could not garner enough controversy, nor enough praise, to be recognized as part of her political portfolio.

Nonetheless, the Black activists who hoped her racial identity would shape her politics were disappointed with her lack of growth from previously regressive stances.

SEPARATING THE PERSON FROM THE POLITICIAN A fourth of Harris’s media coverage since her association with Biden was focused on her race and gender together, yet rarely were her racial and gender identities discussed independently from each other. The “Black woman” or “biracial woman” label is distinct from the “woman” label that often asserts an invisible “white” behind it.

This was one of the major issues that contributed to Harris’s unpopularity. Unlike the sexist criticism aimed at Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton during their presidential campaigns, Harris faces intersectional disadvantages, which compounds racism and sexism.

“

Americans and journalists alike cannot seem to separate Harris from her identity and view her as a politician. A majority of her media coverage focuses on stereotypes of her race and gender, which continues to inform the public’s view of her.

Americans expect Harris to act like a biracial woman, not a politician. Harris’s Black identity does not guarantee activism, and her Indian roots do not guarantee her adherence to religion and Indian culture. Harris should not have to owe any demographic because of her race or gender.

Her biracial identity does not seem to win over either racial group. “Mixed race” does not entail two symmetrical halves, but when news headlines label Harris as a Black and Indian woman, it gives a false perception of equity.

When she makes a genuine attempt at uplifting a demographic, she is criticized for neglecting her other identities. When Harris tries to identify as mixed race, she is criticized for trying to inauthentically appeal to too many demographics. Americans should not blame Harris for this invisible, unsuccessful balancing act.

Despite her negative approval ratings and criticism of her identity, Harris has set an important precedent. She has changed the way America will think about race, gender, and elected officials. Her step into the White House is historic, and paved the way for future minorities and marginalized groups. As Harris said in her acceptance speech in 2020, America is a country of possibilities, and although she is the first of her kind to assume this prestigious role, she will not be the last.

The “Black woman” or “biracial woman” label is distinct from the “woman” label that often asserts an invisible “white” behind it.

nupoliticalreview.com

When she makes a genuine attempt at uplifting a demographic, she is criticized for neglecting her other identities. When Harris tries to identify as mixed race, she is criticized for trying to inauthentically appeal to too many demographics.

Americans should not blame Harris for this invisible, unsuccessful balancing act.

“

“ FALL 2023 — 23

National

LAURA WEPPNER / INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 2026

T

iana Hill was excited to welcome a child into the world. It’s hard to stay optimistic in prison, but Hill—a nonviolent offender incarcerated for violating probation—found hope in the future of her child. Yet, the prison system’s failure to provide healthcare killed her innocent baby four days postpartum. Going into labor, Hill pleaded with the prison guards to take her to the hospital. They refused. Hill lay in her blood for upwards of twelve hours in the prison infirmary, shackled and alone.

United States prisons regularly separate newborns from their imprisoned mothers and withhold prenatal care for incarcerated women.

To support incarcerated women and their children, the US government should guarantee and protect their right to prenatal care, and

“ 24 — FALL 2023

Babies whose mothers do not receive prenatal care are five times more likely to die in infancy than babies whose mothers do.

construct more prison nurseries nationwide.

PUNISHING WOMEN FOR PREGNANCY Approximately 231 thousand women are currently incarcerated, and around 5 to 10 percent are or become pregnant during their time in prison. But the American healthcare and prison systems work together to restrict their access to prenatal care. Almost half of pregnant women behind bars report receiving no prenatal care. Even when just the father is incarcerated, a woman's access to prenatal care will falter due to a lack of support and the hardships of single motherhood. This policy punishes women and their children. Babies whose mothers do not receive prenatal care are five times more likely to die in infancy than babies whose mothers do.

In Estelle vs. Gamble, the Supreme Court ruled that the Eighth Amendment protects prenatal care as it stipulates that there should not be inflictions of unnecessary pain. Yet, there are no federal standards to ensure women get the medical attention that they are constitutionally entitled to.

Prison births are inhumane. Many women report that guards shackled them to hospital beds while pushing their baby

“

nupoliticalreview.com

National

out, or, in some cases, denied them transport to a hospital. Only twenty two states have a policy that bans handcuffing women to beds.

Some argue that women could exploit pregnancy or labor to escape prison, but handcuffing women to beds is often unnecessary: the vast majority of pregnant prisoners

“

instance, the mother must be a non-violent offender and cannot have a sentence over eighteen months. Women who complete the program are less likely to reenter the prison system and feel more confident as mothers due to training and support.

Critics claim that not all mothers adhere to the rules of prison nursery programs by fighting and battling over turf, which can create stressful environments for children. While this may be true, most prison nurseries give mothers independent rooms and hire staff to prevent long-term conflicts. Prison nurseries are also constantly developing techniques for re-educating and evaluating mothers. These mothers show a 37 percent lower recidivism rate relative to women outside the nursery programs, demonstrating that the prison nursery system leads to self-growth.

On average, the government allows a mother who is incarcerated at the time of birth twenty-four hours with her newborn before police take the child away.

are nonviolent offenders and childbirth is a painful experience that makes escape essentially impossible.

By denying moms necessary care, prisons create obstacles for their children and contribute to an endless loop of poverty or imprisonment. Children born to incarcerated mothers are more likely to experience depression and anxiety and are more likely to drop out of school than children born to free moms. A child separated from their mother post-birth (a common prison practice) is more likely to face low self-esteem, difficulty coping with stress, and less successful relationships. Before being born, the American system sets these children up for failure.

On average, the government allows a mother who is incarcerated at the time of birth twenty-four hours with her newborn before police take the child away.

PRISON NURSERIES PROTECT WOMEN Eight American states are pushing back. They allow a mother to raise her child while finishing her sentence with prison nursery systems—a controversial, yet advantageous program.

The "Wee Ones" program is a charity-funded operation at the Indiana Women's Prison. It allows a select group of women to live in separate dorms with their newborn babies.

Many strict stipulations—related to their cause for imprisonment and the duration of their sentence —determine which mothers get to raise their babies behind bars. For nupoliticalreview.com

“

“

JUSTICE FOR INCARCERATED MOMS

be outside, connected with their mother. In 2015, Cayesha Shivers graduated with her son, Kori, from the longest running prison nursery system, Bedford Hills Correctional Facility in New York. She reflects that her time taught her what true mothering looked like, despite having older children who she didn't birth in prison.

As the number of women behind bars rises, we need more policies that protect women’s rights. To address the unjust care of pregnant and incarcerated women, we must educate healthcare workers on the value of prenatal care, provide funding for prison nurseries, and reform birthing conditions in prisons and jails with initiatives like the Justice for Incarcerated Moms Act of 2021 (JIMA).

This act would address healthcare worker education and nursery funding while also expanding prenatal care, including improved nutrition and regular medical visits. JIMA would promote equity and dignity for incarcerated mothers and remind society that, no matter the circumstance, women deserve basic rights.

The Institute for Family Studies argues that when a child grows up, they may experience feelings of shame when they recollect that the first years of their life were spent in prison.

However, these arguments fail to consider the psychological traumas that result from being in the foster system or separated from one’s mother.

Moreover, most prison nursery systems expire once the child is around two years old; studies report that childrens’ earliest memories are formed at two and a half years old.

A child will not grow up with any memory of living in prison, and most of their life will

In 2015, Cayesha Shivers graduated with her son, Kori, from the longest running prison nursery system, Bedford Hills Correctional Facility in New York. She reflects that her time taught her what true mothering looked like, despite having older children who she didn't birth in prison.

“

FALL 2023 — 25

National

SENAM APEDO / HEALTH SCIENCE 2025

T

he Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade was a turning point in US history—a celebratory moment where freedom triumphed and the fundamental human rights of bodily autonomy and personal choice were extended to Americans with uteruses.

The landmark decision has been one of greaThe United States health care system is currently the most expensive in the world.

While national health expenditures far exceed those of other countries, the US fails to produce the best health care outcomes.

There are not enough physicians to meet the needs of the growing American population: some estimate a shortage of 54,100 to 139,000 physicians by 2033.

The clearest solution to resolving this physician shortage is to introduce more doctors to the American medical field by making medical education and training more accessible. Although the solution to the physician shortage is straightforward, the health care system fails to tackle this issue, actively perpetuating barriers to medical care. Those in charge of the healthcare system maintain the shortage to keep medical education as selective and competitive as possible. As the number of new physicians needed to alleviate the shortage rises, so do the salaries of current medical providers.

STEP 1: INCREASE THE ENTRY COST OF MEDICAL EDUCATION In the US, physicians undergo approximately twelve years of education and training before they can seek licensing. After completing

26 — FALL 2023

an undergraduate degree program, passing the MCAT, and undergoing an additional four years of medical school, graduates must complete at least three years of residency training. Then, physicians need to be licensed and certified in the state that they wish to work in before they are legally allowed to practice medicine.

Spending over a decade learning and training is a huge time investment and an even larger financial investment. Applications alone cost hundreds of dollars to complete and submit. The MCAT costs $315 to take, and many who take the exam do not achieve satisfactory scores on their first attempt. An unsatisfactory grade on the exam can significantly limit the schools available to a prospective medical school student, and medical school admissions rates are already extremely low. In fact, the average medical school acceptance rate in the US is currently 5.5 percent, which is less than Princeton’s 2023 undergraduate acceptance rate of 5.8 percent.

Medical school applicants must also submit a primary application to the American Medical College Application Service system, or AMCAS, which includes a first-time cost of $170 and an additional $40 fee. When considering the total costs of the exam and application fees, a prospective student that applies to fifteen schools will spend up to three thousand dollars. With this system in place, medical school

“

applications alone are enough to drive students away from the field.

STEP 2: INCREASE THE COST OF COMPLETING MEDICAL SCHOOL As the price of medical school rises, the amount of debt accumulated by graduates increases as well. In the last decade, many entered the workforce having accumulated $200,000 to $400,000 in outstanding student loans. The financial burden of higher education propagates socioeconomic disparities in the workforce, as those from more privileged social groups have the resources available to become doctors; a quarter of first-year medical students come from families earning

When considering the total costs of the exam and application fees, a prospective student that applies to fifteen schools will spend up to three thousand dollars.

With this system in place, medical school applications alone are enough to drive students away from the field.

“

nupoliticalreview.com

National

“

$250,000 or more per year, and only 5 percent come from families with incomes of about $24,000 per year or less.

Medical schools’ testing and volunteer requirements—on top of their intense coursework—make socioeconomic disparities more apparent. Students must complete a number of volunteer hours along with their course load in order to finish their education.

Meanwhile, many low-income students must continue to work during school in order to afford it. These required volunteer hours are unpaid, which makes completing medical school nearly impossible for those who cannot afford to work for free. These financial barriers may lead many low-income applicants to feel as if medical education isn’t designed to be obtainable for them.

Because of these financial barriers, US medical school applicants and graduates are also disproportionately White. The United States’ long and ongoing history of racism has prevented many minority groups from building generational wealth, meaning that financial barriers impact these groups more than White Americans. The lack of diversity in the medical field often leads to the mistreatment of marginalized groups in the medical industry, another barrier to entry.

STEP 3: MAKE RESIDENCY EVEN MORE RESTRICTIVE The flaws in the current medical education and training system stem from its inaccessibility. But the barriers to becoming a practicing physician were not made by accident.

There are several policies in place that restrict

nupoliticalreview.com

As the price of medical school rises, the amount of debt accumulated by graduates increases as well. In the last decade, many entered the workforce having accumulated $200,000 to $400,000 in outstanding student loans.

the number of medical education and training positions available, intentionally limiting the number of practicing physicians in the US. There are also many policymakers in power who lobby for an even more restrictive system.

The American Medical Association (AMA) is one of the leading stakeholders in the medical industry and is responsible for some of the policies that contribute to the physician shortage. For years, the AMA lobbied to cap federal funding for residencies and cut a quarter of all residency positions. This was in spite of studies suggesting that the US needs a 15 to 25 percent increase in federally funded residency positions to remedy the shortage.

The AMA also influenced the scope of practice laws, which dictate the everyday duties of physicians and other health care providers.

The AMA often lobbies against expanding the scope of practice for non-physicians,

“

FALL 2023 — 27

National

“

For years, the AMA lobbied to cap federal funding for residencies and cut a quarter of all residency positions. This was in spite of studies suggesting that the US needs a 15 to 25 percent increase in federally funded residency positions to remedy the shortage.

towards medical education and training.

They have begun to move in that direction by working to remove caps on Medicare-funded residency slots, though limited by other policies and stakeholders.

The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 introduced a cap on all federal funding for residency positions. Because of this, the number of US residency positions available and the funding provided to train them remained stagnant for decades. The US healthcare system has attempted to alleviate the shortage by moving unused residency training positions to facilities that need them the most.

Unfortunately, these programs are not a complete solution, as they have minimal impact

28 — FALL 2023

“

on the total number of positions available for medical school graduates. While relocating can provide support to understaffed facilities, it does not create new residency positions, which is the most direct way to fix the shortage.

As time passes and the number of medical school applicants in the US increases, the residency shortage becomes much more concerning.

Current strategies to relocate and increase residency training positions will not offset the number of physicians that retire or leave the field every year.

TROUBLESHOOTING…

Though the causes of the physician shortage influence each other, they all boil down to the idea that there is not enough money or seats to train the number of physicians that we need. Considering that the United States has one of the highest national health care expenditures in the world, the lack of funding in medical education indicates that other areas of the healthcare industry

“

are being overfunded. There are many other fields in health care that collect and hoard funds, like the multibillion-dollar pharmaceutical industry.

Along with the unfair distribution of capital, the medical industry demands too much money from students. Lawmakers and other influential powers, such as the American Medical Association, must work to alleviate the physician shortage by reducing barriers to education access. These policymakers and stakeholders should advocate for shorter pathways into highly needed specialties, such as shorter medical degree programs, and more funding. The three responsibilities of the healthcare industry are to ensure and protect health care quality, accessibility, and affordability. In order to fulfill these goals, policymakers must reform the medical education system and resolve the physician shortage.

Though the causes of the physician shortage influence each other, they all boil down to the idea that there is not enough money or seats to train the number of physicians that we need.

“

nupoliticalreview.com

National

ABBIE O’CONNOR / JOURNALISM 2026

nupoliticalreview.com

FALL 2023 — 29

National

130

people a day die from opioid-related drug overdoses in the US, ten times the number in 1999. The opioid epidemic is a crisis that has plagued Americans for decades, taking hundreds of thousands of lives. Losing an average of 187 American lives every day, the United States fervently seeks a solution to the opioid crisis. Yet, many Americans in favor of addiction harm reduction argue that the federal government has not done enough to combat the issue. There are still countless policies in place which withhold federal funding from safe drug consumption sites. Because of

“

the government’s negligence, nonprofit organizations and local jurisdictions have begun to establish safe drug consumption sites without federal assistance or funding.

These sites aim to decrease overdose and disease while promoting rehabilitation—a place where people can administer drugs in a secure environment under the supervision of trained personnel.

The sites provide clean injection materials, medical supervision, and blood testing available to diagnose and treat bloodborne diseases that spread primarily through sharing needles, such as HIV and Hepatitis B. These sites decrease HIV infections through their clean needle exchanges, testing, and other services. Patients are trained on how to avoid, spot, and respond to drug overdoses with naloxone (narcan), a lifesaving drug provided by SSPs which temporarily reverses the effects of an opioid overdose.

At safe injection sites, those 'using' can test their drugs for fentanyl and other dangerous compounds often laced into street drugs which cause overdoses and deaths. Many patients entering these spaces are ill and stuck deep in their addiction, yet are continually met with the primary

“

Contrary to popular belief, Syringe Service patients, those utilizing the sites, are five times more likely to enter treatment than those who don't participate in the programs. They are also three times more likely to stop drug use altogether.

“

30 — FALL 2023

American cities with increasing SSP locations do not experience increases in illegal drug use or crime.

“

care and rehabilitation services necessary to begin their journey to recovery.

LEGAL SUPPORT FEDERAL BARRIERS

AND

Contrary to popular belief, Syringe Service patients, those utilizing the sites, are five times more likely to enter treatment than those who don't participate in the programs. They are also three times more likely to stop drug use altogether. Syringe Service Programs (SSPs) have lowered overdose mortality by 34.7% and 67% fewer ambulance calls for treating overdoses in their surrounding community. The sites are run by trained professionals who not only aim to prevent deaths and provide addiction treatment, but regard their patients as patients rather than delinquents, instilling a sense of trust in the community.

New York City established America's first two safe drug consumption sites in Washington Heights and East Harlem in November 2021. Revolutionary, unfamiliar,

nupoliticalreview.com

National

and widely debated, these spaces prevented over 100 overdoses within a few months. By January 2022, 585 people had registered and used the locations almost 5,000 times. Run by nonprofits, these sites rely on city funding and donations but don’t amass nearly as much as they need or that the federal government could provide.

US drug laws make it extremely difficult to open these sites because it's a felony to possess illegal drugs. While the Biden administration has vocalized support for this harm reduction method, it has not federally endorsed safe injection sites, making it increasingly difficult for the sites to keep their doors open.

FEAR MONGERING, MYTHS, AND MISCONCEPTIONS Arguments against these sites' implementations often include claims of increased drug use, crime in the area, and large operational expenses.

But these claims are nothing but fear mongering. American cities with increasing SSP locations do not experience increases in illegal drug use or crime.

While increased illegal activity surrounding the sites is a justifiable concern, it’s critical to understand SSPs’ role in taking these crimes off the street. Illicit drug administration is inevitable; drug consumption will happen with or without these sites. Crimes

nupoliticalreview.com

associated with administering opioids proves constant; with SSPs, however, dangerous drugs and their victims are taken off the street and into a professional setting, making for safer communities.

30 years of research confirms SSPs are cost efficient and effective in reducing bloodborne infections such as viral Hepatitis, HIV, and other infections. By providing proactive and reactive resources such as clean needles and diagnoses, safe drug consumption sites save millions of dollars that would otherwise be spent on hospital diagnoses and treatments.

From 2010 to 2015 alone, North Carolina saw hospital costs for endocarditis, a primarily drug dependence-related illness, increase from $1.1 million to $22 million without the help of SCS programs who could have caught and treated the infections much sooner. Despite having this data, the federal government remains opposed to the implementation of SCSs due to its taboo nature.

The government’s response to the opioid epidemic bears a striking resemblance to its response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the 1980s and '90s. Initially overrun by taboos stemming from stereotypes about homosexuality and gay sex, the government ignored the AIDS epidemic for years. Once the government finally funded research and improved public education about

“

the illness, the epidemic subsided. The HIV/AIDS crisis shows that advocacy and response to an issue is vital for improvement regardless of social implications.

In the past decade, the nation has seen massive increases in reports of HIV and other bloodborne diseases due to needle sharing and lack of diagnostic screenings. On top of this, the social stigma surrounding the disease has discouraged patients from seeking treatment or testing. We must advocate for those who have fallen victim to an epidemic that has spun out of control. It's time for policymakers to get past taboos and biases and to prioritize harm reduction strategies that will decrease deaths and other opioid dangers.

By providing proactive and reactive resources such as clean needles and diagnoses, safe drug consumption sites save millions of dollars that would otherwise be spent on hospital diagnoses and treatments.

“

FALL 2023 — 31

Perspectives

JAKE EGELBERG / BIOCHEMISTRY 2023 GREEN LINE TROLLEYS FACE TROUBLE WITH ACCESSIBILITY

goals and long construction times threaten to bioengineering major at Northeastern, says. derail the Transformation at every turn.

“Sometimes in the afternoon . . . it’s very packed inside the [Green Line] because that’s when a hen I get confused on the train ACCESSIBILITY FOR THEE IS lot of people finish classes.” lines, I feel . . . helpless. The anxiety ACCESSIBILITY FOR ME The Green Line’s subpar announcement is always there; it's like a shadow,” systems and the sheer number of students Casandra Xavier says.

“We passed the Americans with Disabilities Act, that ride it put students with disabilities at Casandra is a member of the Disability [and] the law said whenever you build some- a disadvantage.

Policy Consortium’s board of directors and thing new, make sure it's accessible,” says Peter was born visually impaired and hard of hear- Furth, a professor of civil and environmental THE TRANSFORMATION ing. On their own, these ailments would make engineering at Northeastern University. “If everyday life challenging for anyone. But years you're in a wheelchair, you should be able to The origin of the Green Line Transformation of trauma also degraded Casandra’s mental just roll on, roll off . . . That also provides a huge traces back to Joanne Daniels-Finegold health, permanently tying her physical impair- benefit to many other people . . . The accessi- nearly two decades ago. Back then, Joanne— ments to intense and chronic anxiety. bility improvements, it would be a mistake to who cannot drive—found herself trapped by Nevertheless, Casandra, who is on per- think that ‘that's not for me.’” the very public transportation that was there manent disability, does her best to push Besides workers with disabilities, the Green to serve her. forward. She makes frequent trips from her Line’s accessibility failures may also restrict Joanne is among the six percent of home in the North End to Brighton to visit educational and employment opportunities Americans with hyperhomocysteinemia. She relatives, attend medical appointments, and for students. has too much homocysteine in her blood, and work out at the gym. And for each of these The Green Line runs directly through with this excess comes clotting, joint pain, and trips, Casandra relies on the Green Line to get large universities like Boston College, increased risks of hip fracture and stroke. where she needs to go.

Boston University, and Northeastern Left optionless by buses’ broken wheelBut the Green Line is hardly dependable, University—which enroll over 150,000 chair lifts, she would push herself 3.5 miles Casandra says. “Every time I want to use a lot students—many of whom rely on the Green to reach the nearest Red Line station. Then, of the Green Line, the announcements are not Line for access to the greater Boston area. broken elevators and inaccessible train cars made for the stops.”

Efficient travel enables students who live at later Red and Green Line stations limited Without audible status updates, Casandra on-campus to commute to work and stu- where she could board and exit. Boston public has no way to know where her train is and if dents who live off-campus to get to class. transit failed her. it has arrived at her stop. “Because of the mix Northeastern University in particular relies And she wasn’t the only one. A group of up with the trains, I would be, like, an hour late, on the Green Line’s expansive reach because advocates across Boston, all of whom felt which would then force me to get out of the of its co-op work-study program— train wherever I am and call an Uber or a Lyft which ninety-six percent of underto finish the route,” she said. graduates participate in.

While Casandra primarily takes the Green Jacob Nudel, a third-year finance Line for social and medical reasons, more than and financial technology major at 65% of Green Line riders depend on the train to Northeastern, needs the Green Line get to work on time. For riders with disabilities, for his co-op at Rapid 7, a cyberseculooking to the Green Line for reliability is off rity firm at North Station. “I hop on the table. This inequity violates the Americans the D line of the Green Line and take with Disabilities Act, which prohibits gov- it to North Station,” he says. “After ernment discrimination against people with work, the lack of sunlight makes it disabilities, and eventually spurred the MBTA dangerous to bike. Ubers exist, but [they’re] stranded by the MBTA, joined her and the to allocate over $900 million to the Green Line pretty expensive after worktimes.”

Boston Center for Independent Living, an Transformation: a four-stage initiative that Northeastern students who live along organization that provides services for people promises to make Green Line stations and Huntington Avenue also need the Green Line with disabilities, in a class-action lawsuit to vehicles one hundred percent accessible. to get to campus. The university provides hold the MBTA accountable for its failures.

The Green Line Transformation is an ambi- these students with free CharlieCards so that In 2006, they settled and the MBTA agreed tious project that involves improving more they don’t need to make the twenty minute to more than 200 stipulations aimed at increasthan thirty stations and replacing every Green trek to campus. ing people with disabilities’ access to Boston Line vehicle. And the MBTA has a long way to “We have a whole bunch of people from the public transit. go before it reaches its destination: unrealistic NUin program,” Alexander Young, a first-year Initially, the MBTA honored many of

“W

“

32 — FALL 2023

By 2015, more than thirty Green Line station platforms remained inaccessible to people with disabilities.

“

nupoliticalreview.com

Perspectives

its commitments; a 2010 joint assessment low-floor boarding at every entrance, rather between the MBTA and the Boston Center than just at the middle doors like the type for Independent Living found that workers eights and nines. repaired station elevators, shortened gaps between station platforms and trains, and commissioned more accessible buses.

However, in 2013, Joanne and her team called out the Green Line as a cause for concern. While the MBTA replaced some inaccessible cars with low-floor alternates—enabling easy roll-on-roll-off access—these cars are only accessible at stations at least eight inches off the ground and, even then, require a bridge plate.

Scott Page, the Boston Carmen’s Union Green Line delegate, pointed out that there are external lifts available to patients with disabilities on low-level platforms. And while the MBTA’s assessment Finally, by consolidating close-by stations, claimed that employees performed daily main- giving trains traffic priority, and investing in tenance checks on lifts, riders’ experiences better track and storage infrastructure, the suggested otherwise.

MBTA looks to reduce travel times and extend By 2015, more than thirty Green Line sta- the Green Line’s reach beyond Boston. tion platforms remained inaccessible to people “If stations are further apart, you with disabilities. “Green Line surface stops . . . have to walk a little bit to get to the represent the area of greatest need within the station, but you're rewarded with rapid transit system,” wrote Laura Brelsford, a faster ride,” professor Furth, an assistant general manager of system-wide expert in civil engineering, says. accessibility at the MBTA. “A second thing that they are Three years later in 2018, the MBTA put the doing on the Green Line is transit Green Line Transformation into action. priority . . . We can provide accessi“From the MBTA’s point of view, [we pri- bility and speed.” oritize] first safety, and then standard of care.

In 2020, the MBTA upgraded We need to make sure that we can eliminate fifteen percent of all Green Line any [dangerous] track conditions that are out tracks, installed floodgates and there for passengers, and that's where you've steel doors at Fenway station, and seen a lot of investment over the last three started renewing the Lechmere years,” said Angel Peña, chief of capital trans- Viaduct, which connects the Green formation at the MBTA. Line to Cambridge. In 2022, the After improving track safety, the MBTA aims to install elevators at stations without them, raise all platform heights to at least eight inches, and replace outdated vehicles with souped-up “supercars.” “We have the type sevens, with the high floor on the inside, the type eights have the low floor on the insides, and the brand-new type nines…also have the low floor,” Page says. But the MBTA’s type ten supercars put these trains to shame. More than one hundred feet long, they can hold twice as many passengers and boast fully accessible

“

nupoliticalreview.com

At this rate—about six stations every four years—it will take nearly two decades until every Green Line surface stop accommodates people with disabilities.

MBTA consolidated four inaccessible Green Line stations along the B-branch into two fully accessible ones at the Amory and Babcock stations, nearly completed the Lechmere Viaduct rehabilitation, and replaced miles of track and signals along the D-branch.

When the Transformation is complete, the MBTA promises greater accessibility for every car and station along the Green Line, shorter travel times, and simplified navigation throughout the Greater Boston area. “Our future is having an accessible, larger car that will help . . . get all of our passengers on board right away,” Peña said.

“

POOR PLANS AND DELAYED DEVELOPMENTS

However, MBTA data reveals that the Green Line has some ways to go before it reaches its lofty aims.

FALL 2023 — 33

Perspectives

In 2015, when Laura Brelsford, the MBTA’s assistant general manager of system-wide accessibility, made specific note of Green Line surface stops as a cause for concern, thirty-one of the Green Line’s fifty-three surface stops were wheelchair inaccessible. Since the Transformation’s

initiation in 2018, the MBTA has renovated or consolidated six into accessible alternatives. At this rate—about six stations every four years—it will take nearly two decades

34 — FALL 2023

until every Green Line surface stop accom- branch, the B and C-branches will not get the modates people with disabilities. attention that they need until construction Because Green Line branches aren’t on the D-branch is complete. equally accessible, certain riders may have to Tim Lasker, president of the Office and wait far longer than others before Green Line Professional Employees International Union, travel becomes a realistic option. According to representing over 400 MBTA employees, the Green Line’s schedules and maps website, attributes the MBTA’s slow progress and poor more than half of surface stops planning to inexperience. “There are a lot of along the B and C branches are people enthusiastic about what they do but wheelchair inaccessible. that don’t have the background or experience At the same time, riders to do it,” Lasker says. “They have a horrible on the B and C branches report track record of completing the work in a having fewer alternative modes time-efficient fashion . . . Sometimes it's setof transportation—and a ting the wrong goals, and [sometimes it’s] not greater reliance on the Green being truthful about the work that's involved.”

Line—than riders on any other Besides these challenges, the Green Line branch; about fifty percent of Transformation takes a relatively narrow B and C-branch riders lack a approach to improving accessibility in the car and, without the Green Line, first place. Even when every Green Line staforty percent depend on walk- tion has been renovated, many passengers ing or ride-share services to get with disabilities may not benefit at all. around, per the 2015-2017 MBTA For instance, the MBTA considers Systemwide Passenger Survey.

Haymarket a fully accessible station and the Despite the urgent need Green Line Transformation doesn’t plan on to renovate B and C-branch on making any improvements to it, but the stations, the Transformation station is far from perfect; Casandra, who is is committing resources to the visually and auditorily impaired, says that, D-branch, which MBTA data “at Haymarket, me and my mobility instructor, shows already boasts the largest we both couldn't hear the speaker clearly, it fraction of accessible stations and riders who was muffled.” Without clear announcements, are most likely to own at least one car. This Casandra had no way to tell if an incoming choice means that, while the D-branch will train was traveling inbound or outbound. become the first fully accessible Green Line Among Green Line stations next on the

nupoliticalreview.com

Perspectives

Transformation’s agenda—Eliot, Waban, Chestnut Hill, Beaconsfield (D-branch), and Symphony (E-branch)—the MBTA intends to improve lighting fixtures and signage but not station speaker systems.

Aliska Gibbins, a professor of mathematics at Northeastern University, stopped using the Green Line altogether once she became dependent on a wheelchair for mobility.

While the stations that she frequented are officially wheelchair accessible, lackluster employee support makes riding the Green Line tedious and embarrassing.

“The Red Line and the Orange Line, they have workers around . . . [but] the Green Line, no one was really there to tell me what was available. The only time I would find out what to do is if I talk to a driver, but then I'm holding up everyone on the train,” she says.

Instead, Gibbins relies on the MBTA’s RIDE program: a door-to-door ride-sharing service for people with disabilities. “You have to book, by six o'clock the night before, you tell them when you want to get to your location and when you're ready to leave,” she says. Then, “a worker will take a van or a sedan… [and] drive me.”

Data, experts, and experiences paint a pessimistic picture of the Transformation: it is progressing slowly, it was poorly planned, and, from the outset, its goals were never going to address the diverse needs of its ridership. But they also suggest ways to turn

nupoliticalreview.com

things around.

For instance, Lasker says that hiring more experienced workers and improving contract management are two ways to speed up planning and construction. “Their contract management is horrific . . . the financial people and the legal people, [they] don't hold the contractors’ feet to the fire,” he says. “The whole hold up with the Green Line extension: they were [proposing] like multimulti-multi-million-dollar stations. What were they thinking?”

Two more ways, Casandra says, are to ensure that stop announcements are clear on all trains and stations and to improve disability awareness training.

The Green Line Transformation is an ambitious project.

Renovating over thirty stations, replacing thousands of feet of track, and upgrading the entire fleet of Green Line vehicles is no easy feat. And the MBTA’s decision to pursue these goals demonstrates a real commitment to improving accessibility, Lasker says. But so far, he critiques, the Transformation has

“

suffered from the same setbacks as other MBTA projects: overly optimistic goals, poor planning, and slow construction.

“Accessibility . . . is something that I have to praise the T for because they have a very good [Americans’ with Disabilities Act] department. They have spent literally millions and millions of dollars on working on accessibility,” he says. But, “they [only] tend to manage by putting out fires.”

Data, experts, and experiences paint a pessimistic picture of the Transformation: it is progressing slowly, it was poorly planned, and, from the outset, its goals were never going to address the diverse needs of its ridership. But they also suggest ways to turn things around.

“

FALL 2023 — 35

Columns

Nicholas Abbatiello / Political Science and Communications 2025 On behalf of Northeastern’s Feminist Student Organization (FSO)

F

rom voting to reproductive rights, the feminist movement has made major leaps over the last few decades. But the fight for gender equality is not over. Women continue to face new challenges each day, juggling issues like workplace sexism and the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade.

These struggles are compounded by social media, which has transformed the landscape of feminism in recent years.

Though an image-based culture has fostered an online environment for feminists to come together and share their stories, art, and messages, it has also allowed others to promote false narratives about feminism. As of late, these ‘anti-feminists’ have been able to propagate their ideas through a unique subsection of social media: memes.

The versatility, simplicity, and wide dispersion of memes causes shifts in popular culture and, therefore, public opinion. As the narrative around gender equality evolves over time, those who benefit from a maledominated system find ways to undermine the feminist movement, either intentionally or unknowingly. The male hegemony convinces impressionable young men that feminism threatens their place in society, prompting them to create memes that perpetuate a false narrative around the fight for gender equality.

FRAMING MATTERS: WHAT AND WHO IS A FEMINIST? Feminism, though simple in its definition, has a controversial reputation. Anti-feminists undermine and frame feminism through an adversarial, us-versus-them perspective.

Through this zero-sum game, in which one person’s gain is another’s loss, anti-feminist men cling to their hegemonic male identity in fear of losing social capital or their societal standing. In order to “win” against feminists, anti-feminists antagonize and create caricatures of women that don’t conform to their version of the ideal society.

Anti-feminists use deep-rooted stereotypes as the foundation for their messaging, mocking feminism through content that can be widely recognized and understood.

Memes possess the unique ability to pass forward anti-feminist sentiments because they give creators the ultimate excuse: “it’s just a joke.” Anti-feminist creators are able to

In order to “win” against feminists, anti-feminists antagonize and create caricatures of women that don’t conform to their version of the ideal society.

36 — FALL 2023

nupoliticalreview.com

Columns

capitalize on impressionable audiences, by normalizing anti-feminist humor, exploiting others for personal gain and approval. Boys who think that making fun of feminists or bringing others down will lead to social acceptance are especially vulnerable to antifeminist rhetoric.

Anti-feminist meme creators know that their audiences are typically male-dominated, aided by algorithmic echo-chambers on social media that enable the positive reinforcement of their content. Users receive content that they’re likely to interact with, limiting the dissemination of alternative perspectives and viewpoints. As a direct consequence. most users likely don’t feel the direct negative consequences of female subjugation but rather the indirect positives of it for male-dominated communities. What these users see is the humor of anti-feminist memes; but they fail to understand that they are developing implicit biases against feminism and cementing their positions of power within a male-dominated society.

However, many anti-feminists are not inherently anti-women, but instead proconformism or anti-label. Anti-feminists frame feminists as radical, hysterical, and often-privileged women who blame their personal issues on societal faults. In many memes, there exists a clear juxtaposition between feminist and non-feminist women.

Non-feminist women are pictured as conventionally attractive, while feminist women are depicted as being undesirable or outside of a eurocentric beauty standard.

nupoliticalreview.com

Because of this, people who want to fit into larger society will exile feminists in seek of self-preservation.

By pitting two different appearances of women against each other, anti-feminist creators pressure viewers to choose which side they want to be on: the “weird” feminists or the “normal” women.

Even those who support gender equality fall prey to anti-feminist rhetoric or use antifeminist humor “ironically.” People don’t look at memes to engage in critical thought and discourse—they look at memes for lighthearted comedy or mindless scrolling. As such, when biased memes pop up, most will likely take them at face value.

But even the simplest of memes have far-reaching implications for women everywhere; meme culture is only a symptom of a larger American plague. It’s

obvious when Representative Ted Yoho calls Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a “F***ing B*tch” that anti-feminist rhetoric has ingrained itself into the greater public, influencing our government and impacting our daily lives. The frequent circulation of anti-feminist memes feeds into the broader acceptance of anti-feminism as a whole. If we do not keep those around us informed, this anti-feminist attitude will continue to proliferate in American society.

FALL 2023 — 37