Categories
Opinion

Capitalism key to resolving Korean conflict successfully

By Chris Giglio

Opinions Editor

North Korea’s shelling of the island of Yeonpyeong last week has tested U.S. policy in the region.  The United States must honor its long-time defense alliance with South Korea in a way that does not provoke a nuclear-powered state with close ties to China to further hostile action.

So far the response from both the United States and South Korea has been one of military deterrence.  We’ve seen deployment of more weapons to the island of Yeonpyeong, a promise from South Korean president Lee to retaliate for any future aggression and the deployment of a nuclear-powered U.S. aircraft carrier to the region.

In many ways a military response is justifiable.  Could you imagine if the United States was bombarded by artillery?  Furthermore the latest attack follows the sinking of a South Korean naval ship, which killed 46 sailors and which is widely blamed on North Korea.

Still, while a military response is justifiable and should definitely play a role, it is not what will ultimately solve the problem.

What needs to be addressed is the backwards, quasi-communist ideology in North Korea that has been forcefully entrenched by the Kim regimes.  This past summer I had a glimpse of this ideology when I visited the North Korean World Expo pavilion in Shanghai.  In this pavilion, meant to display the countries’ cultural achievements, I saw Cold War era films of marching soldiers hailing the “Dear Leader” as a divine ruler. The Kim Regime has proposed that North Korea stands under constant threat from a barbaric and chaotic outside world.  Because of the “ideological education” and repressive measures put in place, many, if not most, North Koreans believe this mantra despite the years of famine and violence they have been subjected to.  The key lies in changing this perception, thereby eroding the government’s justification of its often irrational and violent actions.

There are many ways to begin implementing this change but the most effective way is to promote the quasi-capitalist system that is already slowly beginning to emerge in North Korea.  Because of the extreme poverty North Korea faces, it has recently allowed people to begin selling products in the streets, and the police no longer crack down on illegal markets.  This is a small step in the right direction, but if further promoted, a quasi-capitalist society like the system in China could open North Korea to the world.

The hope is that this would both alleviate the extreme poverty in North Korea and begin to challenge the established principles in the country.  As revealed by Wikileaks earlier this week, China has much to gain by stabilizing North Korea and should therefore be willing to promote these measures.  With Kim Jong-Un set to succeed his father, this may be the perfect time to institutionalize change in North Korea.

By having a more balanced response to North Korean hostility, we can prevent an escalation of violence and help kick-start a very troubled State.

Categories
Opinion

Palin destined for president?

By Chris Giglio

Opinions Editor

In a recent interview with ABC, Sarah Palin stated she could beat President Obama in the 2012 election.  It’s scary to think that the self-proclaimed “Mama Bear” may actually have a valid point.  Obama’s approval rating has dropped substantially since his inauguration from a high of 65 percent to his current rating of 44 percent. Numbers aren’t everything, but the drubbing democrats took in the mid-term elections tells the same story.

Has Obama really been that bad?  Though there has been some economic growth, unemployment remains stuck around 9.6 percent and the economic recovery looks more and more fragile every day.  The war in Afghanistan has seen little improvement despite a surge in military personnel last year.  As a result, the United States is slowly coming to terms with the idea of compromising with the Taliban and pulling out of the conflict.  Politics in Washington seem to be as divided as ever, with newly elected Republicans seemingly at odds with every Democratic bill.  Heaping on one of the largest environmental disasters in U.S. history, it’s easy to see why people would want Mama Bear in office.

But Palin would be a disaster and Obama really hasn’t been that bad.  Despite many difficulties, Obama has overseen some truly progressive accomplishments in his first two years in office.  Accomplishments such as averting a potentially debilitating economic recession, overseeing the further withdrawal of troops in Iraq, lifting restrictions on embryonic stem cell research, improving relations with countries around the world and at least taking a hack at the disastrous state of our health care system.

Furthermore, the problems we do face are not all to blame on Obama’s policies.  He would be the first to tell you that the Bush administration didn’t exactly put him in the greatest position.

But blaming others can only go so far and there is definitely something to the increased criticism he has received.  In his campaign he inspired a nation to greatness but never fully grabbed hold of a population ready for change.  When he said he was going to change Washington’s politics, as usual, no one said it was going to be easy.  Yet he has slowly lost a bit of his identity by deluding his principles in a series of compromises and outright forfeits to opposition.  We’ve seen climate change take a back seat, the watering down of healthcare into an incomprehensible stack of papers and his tip-toeing on the issue of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Obama will have to prove that he can deal with our current problems effectively and regain his progressive voice.  If he can do these two things, he can restore the trust in the millions that turned out to vote for him and keep Mama Bear working for FOX News.

Categories
Opinion

Tackling national debt unavoidable

By Chris Giglio

Opinions Editor

This past Wednesday, an executive commission released a proposal on how to start tackling our $14 trillion national debt. The draft bill would erase $4 trillion of our projected debt by 2020 and bring the annual budget into balance by 2015. Though this draft bill has its problems and is unlikely to pass, it does focus our attention on a problem that is too often pushed to the side: the problem of a debt that is spiraling out of control.

There are serious implications down the road if we don’t start addressing this problem. One is the risk of losing our AAA bond grade, which would substantially increase interest rates on the loans we take out. This would in turn make it much more difficult to finance our debt.

Another concern is that countries such as China will start spending the huge reserves of U.S. dollars they currently hold. This would inject massive amounts of dollars into the U.S. economy and consequently drive down the price of the dollar. We would then face an inflation level that would put U.S. export companies at a disadvantage and drastically decrease consumer demand. People also worry that as foreign countries continue to accumulate U.S. debt, they will have more and more leverage on our policy decisions.

These looming problems are not complicated ideas that our government officials don’t understand. The truth is almost everyone in the House and the Senate is aware of the problem, but no one has the political will to do anything about it. This is because politicians fear that the long-term solutions of cutting spending and increasing taxes will lose them their constituencies.

Politicians succumbing to these pressures can still take action to get our economy on the right path. This would involve focusing the current stimulus packages on programs and investments that actually grow our economy. That seems simple enough but apparently this notion gets lost somewhere in the process. It is amazing to me that after $14 trillion down the hole we still have a deteriorating infrastructure, a manufacturing sector in decline, a declining education system and a widening gap between the rich and the poor.

But more effective government investments is only the start. At some point we will have to increase taxes and start cutting Social Security and health care costs that are set to explode in the next few decades. Every year we wait, the harder the effect of balancing measures will be on Americans. For this reason I hope we find the courage to balance our budget sooner rather than later.

Categories
Opinion

Private prisons use inmates for profit

By Chris Giglio

Opinions Editor

The privatization of jails and correctional facilities should end.  In the United States today there are 264 private correctional facilities, which house nearly 99,000 inmates.  Privatizing this “industry” has become popular because it has saved states money.  In fact, an independent study conducted by the Vanderbilt Institute for Public Policy estimated states could save up to $15 million by using a mix of public and private correctional facilities. As the economic recession drags on, this cost-saving option will become all the more tempting.

But at what cost do we let the drive for profits dictate our actions?  Our goal as a society should be to limit the number of people who end up in jail.  By providing public schooling, welfare to poor families and alternative community activities, we hope to provide a bright future for as many youth as possible.  I worry that the privatizing of prisons is a backwards step in this effort. The goal of any private firm is to maximize profits—for a prison that means cutting costs and getting as many inmates as possible.  I can’t see how either of these goals will better society.

Private prisons will always have the incentive to cut accommodations to prisoners just to the point where civil rights lawyers could bring a case against them.  This has the very real possibility of cutting essential programs that may have otherwise helped prisoners get their lives back together.  The continual drive to bring inmates to prisons leaves a lot of room for corruption.

This has actually happened.  Cases brought to light include one in which two judges received up to $2.6 million to send children to certain juvenile facilities.  At times these children were brought before the court without a lawyer and sentenced to extended lengths of time. Another prime example is the recent immigration laws in Arizona.  This absurd law was originally written by the prison industry of Arizona, which hoped to ensure a steady stream of illegal immigrants into their prisons.

Maybe these are extreme cases or maybe this is only the tip of the iceberg.  Either way, the tendency to view prisoners as a commodity isn’t right.  The idea of profiting over someone else’s misery is sickening.

In the capitalist world, everything seems to be up for grabs.  Prisons, universities and volunteer efforts have all started to fall under the “for-profit” model.  But some things shouldn’t be driven by profit.  It’s time for us to seriously evaluate what those things should and shouldn’t be.

Categories
Opinion

Fans push athletes to heavy drug use

By Chris Giglio

Opinions Editor

Baseball is one of the greatest sports ever played and embodies some of the values we as Americans hold most dear. Playing through a long, grueling season represents persistence, taking a pitch to the body without flinching represents resilience, and injecting a player’s body with steroids represents the relentless drive to win at all costs.

It is unfortunate that this last detail gets thrown into the conversation of baseball. Players over the years have made so many accomplishments just to see the sport get dragged down by a bunch of juicing goons smacking the ball out of the park every other at bat. This is an exaggeration, but unfortunately, not too much of one. Think of Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig, who stared despair in the eyes and inspired a whole country enduring the Great Depression. Or look at Jackie Robinson, who triumphed over racial prejudices and stood as an early symbol for the Civil Rights Movement. Can we ever compare modern day players, who more often than not use steroids, to these iconic figures?

Many players today do play fairly, but they are a minority in a league awash with needles and “enhancers.” The blame doesn’t fall solely on the players. In fact I would argue we as fans are more to blame for this problem. In an increasingly globalized and technologically advanced world, we demand entertainment and results immediately. This puts growing pressure on a sport that is relatively long and at times slow. This also pressures owners to keep sales up and players to produce more runs at a faster rate.

I come from the city probably most at fault for this. In San Francisco, we are not all doctors, but it was fairly obvious that Bonds’s tripling of size was not a natural occurrence. Despite his obvious use of steroids, we cheered him on because he could hit the long ball.

The World Series is upon us, and we should all enjoy and celebrate the sport. We’ve already seen great playoff match-ups like the Giants versus the Phillies, where an underdog from the West annihilated a team whose fans are unbearably obnoxious. But in the process we should evaluate what we cherish about the sport. Do we care about the wins or do we care about the values the sport stands for?

This question should be applied to other sports as well. Should we ignore steroid use in other sports? Should we let criminals continue to play? Should we ignore the new revelations that agents are paying college players under the table? It is easy to answer yes to all these questions now, but in the long run, these issues will corrupt the sports we enjoy.