CubPub - get your fill

Opinion: Thomas Friedman and "The Narrative"

Baileys Original — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:21:26 +0000

First off, I want to say that you are correct in your assertment that many of the problems Muslim and Arab societies experience are compounded by, if not the direct result of, their leaders' irresponsibility and authoritarian tendencies. Dictators such as Ayatollah Khameni in Iran and President Assad in Syria use "The Narrative" of an evil and meddling America to excuse their poor leadership and justify authoritarianism, and it is unacceptable.

However, your article is hampered by a world view that doesn't transcend American jingoism. Essentially, you argue that terrorists and their ideological brethren are fueled by an image of America that is completely false. There is no room for an interpretation of America's role in the Middle East that takes into account the obstruction of democratic developments and the oppression of Arabs and Muslims resulting directly from American policies.

You say that American policy in the Middle East has been marked by humanitarianism for the past two decades, but this is a half-truth. American policy has been equally marked by cynical diplomacy and a calculated willingness to look the other way when anti-democratic governments aid American interests. It's funny that you completely ignored Egypt and Saudi Arabia in your assessment of Middle Eastern policy. Is this because it contradicts your interpretation of history? If you had included these two nations in your list of entities America has been involved with in the last two decades, you would have had to acknowledge that America has directly aided authoritarian regimes that brutally oppress their people. Our tax dollars have bought weapons that the Egyptian government uses to terrorize its own people. Our willingness to look the other way when it comes to Saudi Arabia's blatant anti-democratic tendencies has given tacit endorsement to a nation that couldn't be further from our ideals, or your interpretation of history.

Policies such as these (and I didn't even bother to mention the mess that is America's heretofore biased approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict) are partially responsible for the motivation of terrorism against America. These are not part of a fictional narrative that portrays America as an implacable villain. These are real policies that hurt real people, and spur terrorism in the process by providing fuel for the demented ideologies that compose the radical Islamic community. We cannot dispel the specter of terrorism until we're willing to acknowledge that America has a direct hand in the oppression of millions of people, and is therefore partially responsible for the hatred represented by radical Islam.

Also, I feel that you place an inordinate amount of blame for the evils of terrorism upon the Arab and Muslim communities. The Middle East is a region haunted by the legacy of colonialism and the disruptive effect it had upon society there. The people of the Middle East are still struggling to reconcile their brusque encounter with Western civilization with their own interpretations of civilization and society. Forgive them if this often takes the form of confused and muddled violence. In any case, the blame should be placed upon the culprits who inaugurated the current state of chaos in the Middle East - the imperial powers who threw stones through the windows of the Middle East and then hid their hands. It's important to recognize that America has a prominent place among these imperial powers.

------

This assessment of Friedman's condescending approach to the Middle East does not answer the question he poses at the end of his column, the question that the aforementioned Cub Pub commenter asked me to respond to. Friedman demands that Muslims put forth a positive interpretation of Islam, an interpretation that we can assume must dovetail with Western liberalism. Instead of telling us what Islam is not, Friedman believes that Muslims should tell Americans what Islam is - and it had better be sufficiently liberal. What's more, Muslims should put aside the issues that concern them - for example, the infamous and offensive Danish cartoon drawing of the prophet Muhammad - in favor of conformity to Western standards.

Firstly, one has to laugh at Friedman's naive demand that Muslims come up with a coherent vision that compresses Islam's various interpretations and ideologies into one Western friendly religion/political ideology. Not even Christians have been able to do that, and Christianity is a much older religion that Islam. Why should Muslims be put under pressure come up with a monolithic religion that not even Christians have achieved? Friedman's demand is not only culturally ignorant, but asinine.

Secondly, it is not the responsibility of the Muslim community to be apologists for Islam. There is nothing to apologize for, certainly not when it comes to Islam's relationship with America. The turbulent history between the West and Islam has certainly become more turbulent in the past decade, but this is not solely the fault of Muslims. It is also the fault of Western leaders who have exploited, oppressed, and disrespected Islamic communities around the world since the end of World War I.

Better relations between the West and Islam, therefore, will not be achieved through a one-sided attempt by Muslims to prove their worth to the West. They will be achieved when both Muslims and Westerners understand that distorted images of the other exists on both sides. They will be achieved when both sides attempt to correct these distortions and heal the wounds of history. One thing is for certain - better relations will not come about through Friedman's jingoistic and inaccurate understanding of Islamic-Western relations.

News Analysis: The Focus is on China again

Strawberry Daiquiri — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 03:43:53 +0000

China’s exports are hurting these East Asian markets in addition to the United States. This is because these neighboring Asian countries’ exchange rate have been moving up while the exchange rate of their close trade partner, China, has been maintained to be low.

President Hu Jintao didn’t show any concern with the yuan or the dollar during his comments with the reporters. On Tuesday, President Obama just made it clear to him that his primary concern with China at the moment is their currency being too low. In contrast, Premier Wen, has been showing signs that he will be willing to work with Obama to come to an agreement on currency and U.S trade rules.

One complaint with China is that they act according to their own needs, disregarding what the other neighboring countries ask for.

It is predicted that China will appreciate the currency a little bit in the future since the yuan is extremely undervalued right now. It hasn’t been changed since July 2008 but the government will soon realize what it has to do in order to benefit its own country.

Another issue to be concerned with is that the property and asset bubble is building up in China again. The key to dealing with this is controlling the exchange rate. Therefore, restrictive policy is necessary to manage the situation. However, it is important to note that the policies that work in the U.S won’t necessarily work in China.

Monetary policy in China doesn’t work as it works here in the United States. It doesn’t work that automatically. When they keep the RMB low, they export more, and then they move the dollars that they earn into the Chinese Central Bank. Reserves then increase and the Central Bank can then keep the liquidity in the system as it issues more and more yuan.

Now an asset bubble is building up so they want to raise the exchange rate. The yuan supply in the system is less with the result that the system is less liquid and that keeps interest rates high in the system, allowing them to control the asset bubble.

What China is essentially doing is managing the high interest rate through the exchange rate. This also controls the supply of the RMB since a low exchange rate pumps more RMB into the system while a high one decreases the supply.

The focus is back on China, and the control seems to be in their hands right now. Is this foreshadowing what is to come in the future? Much talk on the ‘powerhouse of China’ and its future control in the global economy has occurred. Is it all starting to come together?

Getting a Congressional Internship

Screwdriver — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:31:26 +0000

The most common type of Congressional internship are those offered by individual offices of members of Congress. These are typically offered in two different locations, Washington D.C. offices and district offices, which have their own distinct characteristics and benefits.

Washington DC Internships
Congressional interns are not typically involved in policy-making, but they benefit from assisting in the day-to-day activities of working in the capital and learning the political process.

Opportunity for involvement in one or more or the following:
- Attend committee hearings and prepare reports
- Research policy and legislation
- Draft correspondence, articles, and speeches
- Represent the office at meetings and briefings
- Lead tours of the Capitol for visiting constituents
- Answer constituent mail

District Office Internships
Unlike Washington, D.C. offices, district offices do not usually concentrate on policy-making, but provide students with valuable experience in the constituent relations and casework.
Opportunity for involvement in one or more or the following:
- Perform casework for constituents
- Record constituent sentiment on policy issues
- Answer constituent mail

Each of these types of internships are handled by the individual offices of Congress members. As such, the application process may vary significantly. Check the office websites and apply directly.

Congressional Committee Internships

A good alternative to working for individual Congress members is to apply directly to a Congressional committee. This is a useful strategy for anyone who wants to gain experience in a specialty area and play up a particular niche in the application process. With 45 committees between the two houses of Congress, there is likely a suitable committee for most majors or discipline.

Limited funds may be available to students eligible for financial assistance. In order to be eligible, applicants must be students of Columbia College, the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, or the School of General Studies. Those who wish to apply for these funds or who wish to receive advice and guidance from the Office of Government and Community Affairs should register their intention to apply to a congressional office by completing the registration form found on this web site. Barnard College offers students completing unpaid internships access to the Alumnae and Donor Sponsored Internship Grant Program. More information, including deadlines and requirements, can be found at: http://www.barnard.edu/cd/

For additional information please refer to the Columbia University Government & Community Affairs website at: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/gca/index.html

Opinion: Fort Hood Shooting Revives Muslim Prejudice

Baileys Original — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:19:49 +0000

Perhaps the ugliest of these irresponsible diatribes comes from Tunku Varadarajan, a professor at New York University and columnist at Forbes Magazine. In a column titled "Going Muslim", Varadarajan likens Hasan to the stereotypically crazed postal worker who suddenly snaps and unleashes violence upon the public. The difference between these two terms, he posits, is that there is a snapping point for the postal worker, while the violent Muslim has no psychological snapping point. Rather, he or she casts off the "camouflage" of integration and reveals himself as an Islamic radical.

There are so many problems with this idea that the mind spins just contemplating it. First of all, the idea of "going Muslim" implies that Hasan's violence and radical beliefs are something held in common by all Muslims. Nothing could be further from the truth. Varadarajan must have missed the memo that there are millions of Muslims living integrated and peaceful lives in American society. Incidents of Muslim-related violence are rare, and incidents of violence related to radical Islam are even rarer. The professor seems to think that Muslims live double lives, uneasily balancing their radically oriental beliefs with liberalism. The facts do not bear this out. The vast majority of Muslim Americans live well-adjusted lives. Hasan's violence is not a reflection of the Muslim American community, but of Hasan's warped world view.

Even more dangerous is Varadarajan's implication that radical Muslims of Hasan's stripe exist everywhere, as if there is a radical Islamic shadow army preparing to assault America any day now. The truth is, Hasan is not symptomatic of a potential wave of Muslim violence anymore than James Von Brunn is indicative of a Neo-Nazi onslaught. The funny thing is that when Von Brunn committed his hateful shooting at the Holocaust Museum earlier this year, nobody went as far as to claim that he could be the first in a line of radical conservative killers out to destroy the enemies of their "America", despite the fact that the Department of Homeland Security warned of such acts of violence.

We must ask, then, why the clamor to interpret Hasan as evidence of a radical Muslim presence in America? I can only attribute this rush to judgment to a reflection of American prejudice against Muslims and people of Middle Eastern descent. It is sad that in this day and age, with our supposedly enlightened way of life, we cannot turn away from the asinine ideas of prejudice that haunt our nation. I would hope that the next time Varadarajan and people who share his thinking jump to the conclusion that Muslims are out to get America, they stop to analyze the situation and realize that their attitudes are motivated by an unthinking prejudice that has no place in modern America.

CPU Issue Guide #1: Healthcare is Out Now!

Baileys Original — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:43:17 +0000

Young Women in Riyadh: Between Transgressions of Islamic Rules and Consumerist Norms

kahlua on the rocks — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:27:56 +0000

Ms. Le Renard's study was conducted on the Alaysha campus, a single sex public university campus in Riyadh surrounded by high walls and regulated, at least on paper, by a set of government issued regulations that follow Islamic teachings regarding how women should appear and act in public. These include very conservative dress codes such as wearing dark colored, undecorated 'Abayas (traditional Muslim overgarment) on the head to give a shapeless appearance to a woman opposed to the more flattering and feminine look given by wearing 'Abayas on the shoulder. Wearing an 'Abaya is considered a very conservative Muslim dress code that is meant to be modest, but Ms. Le Renard observed that many young women in the campus either did not wear Abayas, but rather very Western clothes, some very revealing such as tank tops and tshirts (sometimes even with provocative messages on them), or turned the Abaya into a fashion statement by wearing intricately decorated ones and on the shoulder.

To clarify, the general guidelines stating how a Muslim should dress are meant to assert three things: 1) a feminine identity, 2) a Muslim identity and 3) modesty. Interestingly, young women who transgress this dress code do not make an effort to hide them while at school. In fact, Ms. Le Renard suggests that it has instead become a peer-pressured sort of culture in of itself-- to see who could be more fashionable and have new ways to transgress these dress codes. Through these transgressions, she claims, young women are constantly redefining pre-existing norms, testing limits and contributing to a progressive movement. However, one should note, she says, that this progressive movement is not political in nature. Most of the young women who transgress this dress code are not doing so because they want to be "liberal" -- a very defined category for them. Many of them think that liberal Saudi women who speak out on television for voting rights and integrated co-ed work spaces are radical and overly influenced by their experiences in the West. For older women, things like voting in municipal elections are not even of interest because of how little importance they carry.

Naturally one wonders how these young women justify their practices. Many do not consider their transgressions to be a form of revolting. They recognize a clear difference between convictions and practice. Many are still very much Muslim, but simply do not see a problem between their dress codes and their beliefs and push against a literalist translation of Islam. These young women are very interesting because they represent an emerging group in urban Saudi; while they are not a large percentage of the population they're establishing themselves as an essential rather than peripheral group of society and helping redefine what society's norms are. Many of them have new, more visible jobs and carry a symbolic impact.

At the conclusion of the talk, one member of the audience asked a very interesting question, " Why do universities have these rules if they're not usually firmly enforced, for why else would there be so many cases of transgressions?" Ms. Le Renard acknowledged that the punishment was indeed not often given out and even the punishment itself was not so severe: Write a promise to not repeat the same transgression. It should be noted that if a student has written three such promises, she may be expelled from the university. Ms. Le Renard did not give a definitive answer, but suggested some very plausible explanations such as:

Maybe the administrators are not quite convinced about the importance of these rules themselves
Maybe parents are not quite so convinced of these rules and thus continue to allow their daughters to dress how they want to, or they are not aware because their daughters will bring multiple sets of clothes to change into once at school
or maybe administrators are too lazy to deal with so many cases of dress code transgression.

Opinion: Whatever Happened to Wanting World Peace?

Tequila Sunrise — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:58:16 +0000

Until it emerged that she wasn’t the squeaky clean role model she pretended to be. First, a controversial photo of a partially nude Prejean surfaced on the web. Then, her feud with the Miss California pageant organizers turned very ugly as a suing war ensured and she lost her crown. To top if off, bloggers found a sex tape she made for her boyfriend on the ever-handy Internet, which many speculate led to a settlement in the suing war.

But Prejean of course, didn’t want to sink back into anonymity, and following in the footsteps of her role model Sarah Palin, wrote a scathing, “tell-all” memoir titled “Still Standing”. And like other fame-chasers, she appeared on every single talk show she possibly could to promote her novel, including Larry King Live. And on the show, she repeatedly told King that his question about why she settled with Miss California pageant organizers was “inappropriate.” And she took off her microphone and her equipment in the middle of the interview, without any provocation from King, while continuously flashing a beauty-queen smile at the camera.

In that one interview, whatever credibility she had left after the nude pictures, the sex tape, the pageant scandal, was completely and utterly decimated. King’s question was harmless and she could have always politely refused to answer the question instead of throwing a controlled hissy fit in the middle of an interview with a reputable journalist. Her actions in stopping the interview reveal just how self-centered she is. Whatever Carrie Prejean wants is what Carrie Prejean gets.

And in her delusional state, Prejean is still clamoring about a liberal conspiracy, a plot to destroy her reputation, and a double standard against conservative women. Well, it’s not a liberal media conspiracy, it’s not a plot to discredit her, and it’s not a double standard against conservative women – at least not anymore. It’s simple self-destruction. And what a pity too considering just how few nationally known women there are these days willing to speak out for the social right.

News Analysis: Playing Nice with China

Guinness Slammer — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:24:32 +0000

Had the change in presidential approach come earlier while U.S. still had considerable clout and the financial robustness to support its policies, it would have shown that U.S. can be aggressive and demanding, but that it chose not to. As a result, the gesture could have lent more authenticity and value to U.S.'s willingness to listen. But now that China has risen this far, the current climate serves to undercut the effectiveness of this fundamental change in American foreign policy. To onlookers today, it would seem as though U.S. changed its stance not out of its own initiative but because it had to accommodate for a more powerful China.

The lack of impact in terms of appearances notwithstanding, Obama's first visit to China suggests that playing nice with China may very well be in vain. The White House haggled to bring in popular Chinese bloggers to Obama's "town hall" in Shanghai staged by China, but the Chinese government barred them from coming. Also, unlike former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush who demanded and were granted opportunities to directly address the Chinese and have it nationally broadcasted, the current White House had to make do with a thoroughly scripted and highly insulated "town hall" in Shanghai, about which "a third of some 40 Beijing university students interviewed Tuesday were unaware." In the end, U.S. walked away without getting very much from China, and as one article notes, the visit underscores "a fast-rising China more willing to say no to the United States."

Although White House officials stress that "Mr. Obama's method would yield more in the long term," Obama's visit makes one wonder just how realistic that view is. If U.S. continues to grow weaker relative to China, it will become even more difficult for U.S. make demands. We may soon come to a point where U.S. can no longer assume the role of big brother or even a partner to China, and may have to "beg" China. Given this trajectory, it is unlikely that in the future, U.S. will be able to win significant concessions from China without giving equally or if not more in exchange.

While such a future may be long in coming, the possibility should nonetheless propel the U.S. to act with urgency. This is not the time for the U.S. to be leisurely biding its time for some future breakthrough. It is imperative that the U.S. finds a way around China's stubbornness soon if it wants to bargain with China effectively while it is still a recognizably strong player on the international stage.

Event Review: Jeffrey Sachs Offers Perspective on the Struggling Economy and a Paralyzed US Political System

Screwdriver — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:39:15 +0000

Creating the Next Bubble

“The right idea was the clean recovery.”

Sachs calls the stimulus plan “lousy and thrown together” and says that the government has squandered its only shot at making improvements through fiscal policy. With a far-sighted vision on how the recovery should happen, he strongly advocated the Keynesian solution of investing in infrastructure. His proposals for infrastructure address long term development of green technologies but also implementing existing technologies. Examples he listed included investing in next generation transport, such as high-speed rail and electric cars, and reclamation of wetlands. The stimulus did direct significant funding toward infrastructure, but much of it went to resuming “shovel-ready” construction programs with a focus on job creation. Though short-term job creation is a politically favorable objective, this focus on infrastructure maintenance neglects the supplementary purpose of infrastructure investment which is opening new avenues for economic growth.

The End of Poverty

Sachs used the context of the US economic and political crisis to reintroduce the topic of international aid and our responsibilities to the developing world. Having advised and represented developing countries during economic crisis, he has been a steady advocate for an increase in federal funding for international aid. He reiterated economic arguments in favor of this, but the discussion quickly reverted back to criticism over wasteful spending on the part of the US government. International aid will also be one of the casualties of the meticulous process of passing legislation, as he cited that Obama has already failed to renew federal aid funding for this year. Given the abundance of domestic priorities that come before it, Sachs predicts the availability of aid will come down to revenue. Because the conservative opposition is vehement in their criticism of spending and Democrats are reluctant to raise taxes and take on new liabilities, aid funding may remain entrenched in the political system for years. Despite the improbability of passing his entire agenda, Obama has no choice but to project optimism and hope for the best., but Sachs' vision for the future isn't as hopeful as once stated.

News Analysis: How Much Trust Should We Put into Numbers?

Strawberry Daiquiri — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 04:40:06 +0000

The unemployment rate also began to reach unimaginable numbers, touching 10.2% last month, still below the post World War II’s 10.8%. This number has been higher than ever since the Great Depression. 5.6 million Americans have been out of work for more than half a year even when trying to find employment. Short term unemployment rate, however, has started to decline. It now stands at 4.5% rather than the 4.9% it experienced in May. Historically, unemployment rates lag behind the recovery of the economy so this 10.2% that we are seeing may just be there merely to scare us, not necessarily telling us any stories.

Consumer confidence has also unexpectedly fell in November to a three month low of 66 from 70.6 in October, according to Reuters/University of Michigan preliminary sentiment index. On the same lines, consumer spending dropped to 63.7 from 68.6, with a projected forecast of rising to 71. Estimates ranged from 67.5 to 75; the actual 63.7 came off as a surprise. Could a combination of high unemployment and low consumer confidence (perhaps the former influencing the latter) be preventing us from experiencing an emerging economy?

To what extent should we trust these numbers as the source between distinguishing if there is a possible recovery or not? History tells us that we shouldn’t pay too much attention to unemployment rates since they usually lag against GDP growth. However, the federal budget deficit and the consumer confidence numbers may be signaling to us that a clean cut U shaped recovery will probably be impossible.

Opinion: Balloon Boy Gets Popped

White Russian — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 23:52:12 +0000

News Analysis: Bloomberg’s Crusade for a Third Term

Snakebite — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:25:12 +0000

Regardless of political opinion, this was a notable election in many ways. Bloomberg broke national records for both private campaign funding (he poured nearly $100 million from his personal fortune into his campaign), but also for re-election to a third consecutive term, an unprecedented move that required an amendment from the City Council. Many New Yorkers are now up in arms over what they see as a wealthy business man essentially buying himself a third term. New York City gossip blog Gawker reflected this opinion in their anti-endorsement saying, “[Bloomberg] has been unable to win any political battle with anyone he couldn’t literally buy off… He is personally a jerk. He is a thin-skinned, unpleasant, sanctimonious asshole…”

Despite this virulent criticism, Bloomberg has plenty to show for his first two terms in office. Shortly after winning his first term in 2001 with a margin of only three points, the mayor’s office quickly went to work gaining control of the public school system and banning smoking in restaurants and bars. Under his watch, test scores have steadily increased and crime rates continued to drop. Recent medical studies concerning the dangers of secondhand smoke have also made his battle for public health appear increasingly attractive. While some of his more ambitious dreams, particularly a massive football stadium on the Upper West Side of Manhattan intended to win the 2012 summer Olympics bid for New York, have gone unrealized, the mayor has gained a reputation for pushing through legislative opposition standing in the way of his agenda.

Many Democratic leaders believe the five point margin is a sign that Bloomberg needs to change the tone of his administration. Aides who served the mayor during the first two terms are leaving and Bloomberg has announced intentions to change the heads of various agencies. "I am who I am, I say what I believe," said Bloomberg. "My only focus is to try to make this city better."

News Analysis: House Passes Risky Health Care Bill but Momentum in the Senate will Remain Elusive

Screwdriver — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:55:48 +0000

Although Obama has refrained from formally proposing health policy, he has lent his public voice to garner political support for his affiliates in Congress and to call out the opposition. The day after the vote, he took to the podium to applaud those who voted yes in the House and to press the Senate to set a quick timetable for its passage in the Senate. Because most of the policy matters will be left out of his hands as it passes through the Senate, the president's role will be relegated to one of lending his popularity to uncommitted senators precariously straddling the line and likewise, using his personal influence to undermine the tactics of an already decided Republic opposition. Compromises in actual policy though will be administered through Democratic senators such as Majority Leader Harry Reid. Although Reid has been an advocate of a progressive agenda much in line with the White House, he is looking towards next year's midterm election and appeasing a constituency with conflicting state priorities in mind. Obama's supplemental role will be that of providing political coverage to cooperating senators like Reid who are taking political risks in deferring state responsibilities to tackle health care reform.

Although Democrats control the majority in both houses of Congress, it's apparent that their strategies are drastically different in moving the bills through the vote. The Senate Finance Committee bill had started out under a naive overture of bi-partisanship; proposing a bill that lacks a public option and costs a modest $8.3 billion. Meant to court conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans, the bill's centrist approach proved unpopular on both sides as liberals criticized the amount of compromise made and the antagonistic attitude of conservatives had not change. Rather than risking the uncertainty of courting moderates, House Democrats seem to have chosen to exploit their stronger majority to jam a bill through. However, House Democrats must also realize that their bill will change substantially in the Senate, and they won't have control over which compromises are made. Nonetheless, their approach of packing the bill with as much as possible may be the best way to make sure House Democrats' priorities are addressed in Senate floor debate.

Opinion: Some Thoughts on Political Science

kamikaze — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:59:40 +0000

I understand if Columbia, being a liberal arts college, wants to encourage students to be intelligent, well-rounded thinkers rather than just pre-professionals content with their own specific field, but as many political science majors eventually choose to pursue careers related to, well, policy and government, the lack of emphasis on quantitative reasoning and practical training wouldn’t exactly give these students an advantage when they go off into the real world. As governments slowly start to resemble corporations, quantitative data becomes just as important as qualitative reasoning in justifying decisions. Having worked for the government over the summer, I don’t profess to knowing how the system works, but what struck me was the fact that bureaucracy was not just a model I learned about in my International Politics course but a central actor responsible for the livelihood of millions of citizens. While esteemed scholars present their theories on how governments function, the people in government couldn’t care less—they just want to get the job done and make sure nobody gets hurt at the end of the day. The divide between the academic and professional concept of “politics” is quite troubling, as it might result in a day where we study political science for its own sake rather than for actually improving the process of making policy.

The political science classes at Columbia provide a good introduction to such a complex and uncertain “science,” but whether it is a comprehensive reflection of the field would be a totally different question. Sometimes I wish classes would have a better balance between the abstract and practical aspects of political science, so I could both understand a policy and have the adequate analytical skills to actually formulate one. But then again, maybe I’m just taking the wrong classes.

Opinion: The Divided Elephant

Tequila Sunrise — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 02:36:15 +0000

In 2008, 2010 or any other big election year, the Congressional race in upstate New York would have been a small statistic considering the 435 or so other races taking place at the same time. But because its 2009 and because of the actions preceding the election, the race in New York’s 23rd Congressional District captured the national spotlight. The weekend before the election, GOP-backed and moderate Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava withdrew from the race after her poll numbers plunged thanks to Conservative Party-backed Doug Hoffman. The rebellion by grass-root conservatives against the GOP establishment allowed the Democrat, Bill Owens, to win in a district that has been Republican-controlled since 1993.

The question now is, will this happen again and with more frequency in 2010? Will “grass-root” conservatives rebel against moderates Republicans across the country and hand even more wins to the Democrats? Will the “grass-root” army headed by Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck overwhelm the establishment?

With the Democrats split on health care, 2010 would be the perfect time for Republicans to stage a comeback and cast aside their status as the powerless opposition. But the childish bickering within the party threatens to destroy this opportunity.

Their number one priority right now should be finding a charismatic and likeable leader who can unite the party. Populists and right-wing Conservatives such as Sarah Palin and Tim Pawlenty are too divisive while centrists such as Mitt Romney would anger the far right and propagate the rebellion. They need to find someone with conservative stances on social and fiscal issues who is also knowledgeable and likeable. They need to find a Washington outsider with insider knowledge. A leader like this could unite the GOP and remind everyone that far too much is at risk, such as a costly and inefficient health care bill, for them to bicker amongst each other.

The two factions need to remember that in the end, they do have much in common, such as fiscal conservatism – a fact that the “grass-root” conservatives need to realize before they pulverize any remaining power the GOP has by splitting the vote.

Only then will the recent election results be the beginning of the return to power and importance of the Grand Ole Party.