THE BROWN

SPECTATORA JOURNAL OF LIBERTARIAN AND CONSERVATIVE THOUGHT • VOLUME IX , ISSUE III • 4/2012

What’sgoing on

with

UCS

featured

8

10

11

closing the curriculum A requirement in thinking

part of the solution On Brown’s responsibility to the city

2 analysis

a civics fix for Brown What to do about our civics ignorance

T H E B R O W N

SPECTATOR

editor-in-chief Ryan Fleming

senior managing editor Manas Gautam

managing editors Kelly Fennessy Olivia Conetta Oliver Hudson

design editor Philip Trammell

photographer Tasha Nagamine

business managers Gabriela Suarez

copy editors Samuel Choi Stephanie Hennings Christopher Kim

contributors MacLain Christie (U. Rochester ’13) Alex Drechsler J.P. Hare Daniel Prada Tom March

For questions, comments, subscriptions and responses, email editors@brown-spectator.com.

If you are interested in contributing to The Brown Spectator (or in doing some web design!), contact ryan_fleming@brown.edu.

It’s election season again, and we find the country divided into Obama fanatics on one end and Christian evangelicals on the other. People who identify as center-left to center-right are left stranded without an obvious candidate to support. Perhaps this has always been the way of the American political system, as potential politi-cians become more radical as they conform to their party. But this is not really a rant about the bipartisan system prev-alent in the United States and its flaws. I wish to write about the big-gest problem the US, and indeed the world, faces: a lack of genuine, hardworking leadership. If we think of America as a corporation and its citizens as shareholders, we see a very badly run organization. If this were a publicly listed company, activists would long have taken over the company by buying all the shares, firing the board, and electing a new one that would safeguard the shareholders’ interests—one that would not go on empire-building spending sprees, waste resources, or forget about innovating with the times (RIP Kodak). When it comes to the search for a new, reliable CEO, you might think twice before picking a man who has married three times. On the other, you would not keep your current executive simply on the grounds that he cannot screw up any more. Both inconsistency and incumbency are red flags in their own right. Political jobs in ev-ery country do not attract readymade talent like jobs in information technology and finance do. The meritorious, deserving candidate might never be discovered if he just ends up writing a candidate’s speech without receiving credit. Rising to political prominence re-quires luck and funding, not just relevant credentials. This may ex-plain why we do not have a surplus of competent candidates who are motivated to improve our country’s situation. We have chosen—and therefore deserve—the people who represent us. It is our job, as shareholders, to make sure we keep ourselves and our friends informed when the management takes the country in the wrong direction, and it is our duty to be proactive when we feel there is an emergency. A great recent example of grass-roots effort has been the activism that surrounded the PROTECT IP Act and Stop Online Piracy Act and led to the defeat of those bills. Herd mentality will not break the loop of mismanagement. Being the rational optimist, I know we can come to the right election decision in the long run and overcome our endemic problem of me-diocre leadership. But first we have to get our hands dirty and do our own homework on the candidates. This is why we have made it our goal to bring a conservative voice to Brown’s campus: because the solution begins with a well-informed electorate, and a well-informed electorate begins with a balanced presentation of political news and opinion.

Kind regards, Manas Gautam

Senior Managing Editor

editorial board

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

1

what’s going on with UCSBrown students, so fond of protesting this and that, should take up the challenge of cleaning their own back yard and making sure UCS is subject to the popular scrutiny that every government deserves.

on our responsibility to the poorA society that employs the voluntary, interdependent forces of the market, as opposed to the involuntary, coercive forces of the state, best answers the concerns of the left.

rethinking the open curriculumSince reasoning underlies all actions, even “creative” actions, then the best preparation for life is to sharpen one’s reasoning. No subject does this better than mathematics.

a civics fix for BrownAs Brown students, why do we so under-perform our peers in an understanding of American civics? And more importantly, what can we do about it?

part of the solutionMayors, officers, and zealous students should think twice before blaming Providence’s budget woes on Brown’s tax- exempt status.

my life is your asset?Facebook, worth approximately $100 billion, is the first substantial social medium whose content is created entirely by its users. That’s $125 per user. Is personal information really worth so much?

colorblindEspecially as Supreme Court now weighs the constitutionality of race-based affirmative action, we ought consider the merits of an entirely socioeconomic system of th.

remembering Joe PaternoWe should not let the tragic mishandling of Jerry Sandusky’s actions overwrite Joe Paterno’s genuine contribution to the history of college football.

music reviewGrouplove doesn’t push the envelope in any musically exciting ways with their recent album Grouplove, but they do seem to bring a fresh smell to the normal rock instrumentation.

laugh now, cry laterA collection of political cartoons for yourenjoyment.

2

5

S

8

10

14

18

19

20

CONTENTS visit us online at brown-spectator.com

11

16

COVER

2 S opinion

taken as much from it as they wanted and done whatever they wanted with it. The leftover funds would then be given to UFB, which would allocate that money to every other student group. UCS’s members were essentially claiming as much money as they wanted at the expense of every other group. Not even the greediest banks are that bold at taking other people’s money. Within UCS, there was little to no discussion about how to handle their budget woes other than to com-mit highway robbery. A member of UCS spoke with the Spectator on a condition of anonymity and said, “The UCS leadership justified their amendment by identifying the bad blood between UCS and UFB. However, there was ab-solutely no discussion on how to actually fix that problem

or even how we would phys-ically receive funding under the new system. When I asked about that and tried to bring up alternatives to the amendment, I was essentially told to shut up. The only discussion allowed was criticisms aimed at UFB

and justifications for a power grab by UCS.” Before UFB or any other group had a chance to re-act, the amendment was put up for voting on MyCourses where it was described as “clarifying the relationship be-tween UCS and UFB,” and the intent of the amendment was clouded in political jargon and doublespeak. The executive board of UCS immediately published an editorial in the Brown Daily Herald pining that UCS needed more money for its projects that supposedly benefit the school commu-nity (none of which the board mentioned specifically) and then complained that Dartmouth student government re-ceives significantly more money than UCS—a humorously poor argument. Before UFB could respond with a similar editorial, the amendment had been up for vote for days. UCS would have gotten away with it if it weren’t for the actions of some of its meddling constituents. The amendment faced an immediate backlash on Facebook and other social media, including numerous memes that poked fun at UCS’s attempt to steal everyone’s money. In the end,

The Undergraduate Council of Students, Brown’s student government, has long dealt with the prob-lem of obscurity and a lack of recognition around

campus. The problem is so bad the recent polls suggest that over half of the student population has no idea what UCS even does. This semester, however, UCS managed to make it to the forefront of campus water cooler talk when it at-tempted to pass a constitutional amendment that required a campus-wide referendum vote. Unfortunately for UCS, this amendment brought major attention to the inade-quacy of Brown’s student government.

The Problem with the Amendment On February 8, UCS passed a motion for an amendment to the UCS constitution that required a 2/3 majority vote by the entire student body. The amendment was an attempt at a major overhaul of current student activity funding, which works as follows: Every un-dergraduate student entering Brown University is required to pay a “Student Activities Fee,” currently set at $178. These fees are then put together in a large pot of money, and the Undergraduate Finance Board (UFB) determines how to allocate it to all the var-ious clubs on campus, including UCS. (UFB is a group of 12 students, and it is technically a subsidiary of, and was created by, UCS.) UFB allocates money in two ways: Spring budgeting and supplemental funding. The spring budget-ing is individual funding done by all groups and is the base funding for the entire year a group. Supplemental funding occurs when certain costs not covered by spring budgeting come up and a group needs extra money. This can happen at any point in the year. UCS, tired of having funding requests denied by UFB (a challenge that every student group needs to deal with), wrote an amendment to restructure the current sys-tem so that it could have unlimited funding for itself. Un-der the amendment, the entirety of the student activities fees would have been given to UCS, and they could have

RYAN FLEMING

Within UCS there was little to no discussion about how to handle their budget woes other than to commit

highway robbery. All discussion consisted of criticims aimed at UFB.

what’s going on with UCS

3Sopinion

$200 in funding, and category III groups are eligible to ap-ply for additional funding. The system works well enough, but it isn’t perfect. Problems often arise because there are no strict guidelines as to what qualifies something to become an official stu-dent group. The lack of guidelines allows personal bias to form the foundations for certain judgments. Two notable instances of personal bias getting in the way of judgments this year occurred when the Brown Political Review (BPR) and the Quidditch Club attempted to gain group status. The BPR’s goal was to become a non-partisan political publication, but UCS rejected the pro-posal mostly because there was an apparent overlap with the Janus Forum (which publishes nothing). While it makes sense to avoid overlapping groups, UCS has fickle

UCS wasn’t able to cheat the system this time. Unfortu-nately, though, the deficiencies in student government don’t end there.

The Problem with Student GroupsOne of UCS’s most important tasks is to create other stu-dent groups and give them category status. For those un-familiar with the process, whenever people want to form a student organization (such as The Brown Spectator), they must seek approval from UCS to become a category I group. This allows them to use Brown facilities to organize meetings and allows them to attend activities fairs to rep-resent their group. After they are a category I group they can go back to apply to be a category II and later a category III group. Category II and III groups receive a baseline of

Unlike President Simmons, unfortunately, we can’t all take the time to sit in on UCS meetings.

South Asian Student Association (which of course includes Pakistan). Brown Asian Sisters Empowered is also among the other 19 Asian student groups along with 3 groups dedicated solely to helping women at Brown. This is not to say that these groups aren’t relevant in their own right, but there certainly is a significant degree of overlap about which UCS does not seem to be concerned. The Quidditch club faced a different dilemma. Its fate was sealed because UCS did not feel that it was a le-

gitimate activity. In the official UCS minutes, a member is quoted as saying, “Seems to be a pickup sport that people play—waste of time.” Despite the fact that numerous col-leges compete against each other in annual tournaments, UCS still could not see why people would enjoy this “waste of time.” UCS was also skep-tical that Quidditch was a sport and therefore should be regulated by the Athletic Department. A valid point, but inconsistent with UCS’s previ-ous approval of Brown Polo Club as a category III group. UCS surely isn’t helping Brown shake its snobby Ivy League stereotype by allowing groups like polo but not Quidditch. UCS laments their non-exis-tent presence on campus, but per-haps they should recognize it as a blessing in disguise. If these short-comings and biased, quasi-political judgments became better known throughout campus, they might face a strong student backlash. Perhaps Brown students, so fond of pro-testing this and that, would take up the challenge of cleaning their own backyard and making sure UCS is subject to the popular scrutiny that every government deserves.

standards. Just this past year, UCS has approved 3 student groups that overlap existing groups in obvious ways: the Swan Ballet Club, Pakistani Students Association, and Brown Asian Sisters Empowered. The Swan Ballet Club closely resembles the Ballet Club, with the main difference that the Swan Ballet club wants to be exclusive and to compete against other ballet clubs. The Pakistani Student Association is now one of 19 student groups dedicated to Asian students, including the

continued | what’s going on with UCS

4 S opinionadver tisement

5Sopinion

on our responsibility to the poor

DANIEL PRADA

arguments were and how ignorant, stupid, and frankly im-becilic their ideas. With the election of Obama in 2008, I felt that the country was finally reaching a state where everyone would be guaranteed the rights that they de-served—to healthcare, to pensions, to good working hours, to education, and to safety. But here I am four years later, a committed lib-ertarian. I don’t think it would be intellectually honest to say that I “reached the age of reason” or “finally made up my mind.” The conversion was part of a slow but ulti-mately radical shift in the way I viewed my world. I still share similar ends behind progressive political ideology, and my vehement defense of capitalism is not out of an indifference to the indigent. Rather, it springs from a con-

scious realization that a so-ciety that employs the volun-tary, interdependent forces of the market, as opposed to the involuntary, coercive forces of the state, best answers the concerns of the left.

II. My caseWhy are incarceration, poverty, recidivism, homelessness, domestic violence, drug use, gang membership, dropout, debt, and malnutrition rates so high among low-income blacks, southeast Asians, and Latinos? At First GlanceThe factors are complex, but the story is simple. From the beginning of such children’s lives, they find themselves in poor-performing school districts because their families cannot afford the property taxes for great ones. As the kids grow up, they consume foods with an overwhelming amount of high-fructose corn syrup, dras-tically increasing their propensities for diabetes, heart at-tack, and cancer. Upon (hopefully) graduating high school, these students underperform relative to their wealthier teen-age peers in the job market due to the previous lack of high-quality public schooling. Especially in a country with

As a little boy in Colombia, I remember walking through Bogota’s busiest streets firmly holding my mother’s hand. I was afraid, terrified by the num-

ber of beggars lining outside Unicentro, one of the larg-est commercial malls in the country. As I grew up, my fear evolved to shame, then grew into frustration. The more I grew up and noticed the disparity between those who begged for enough money for food and those who went inside the fancy mall purely for recreation, the more indig-nant I became. “If only these people gave a fraction of their wealth to the poor,” I would think to myself, “we could have such a healthier, safer, and simply nicer world.”

I. A PreambleDuring my time here at Brown, I learned thoroughly of colo-nial Latin American repression, U.S. military and economic imperialism, as well as how race, class, and sex perpetuate the hierarchies of oppression, which still shape society today. Augusto Pinochet, Fulgencio Batista, Rafael Trujillo, Cas-tillo Armas, Plan Colombia, Leopoldo Galtieri, Francisco Franco, United Fruit Company, Maquiladoras, Operation Wetback, Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, Operation Condor, the International Monetary Fund, the School of the Amer-icas—these were part of my everyday vocabulary. From my studies, I came to the conclusion that distributive justice to the generations of indigenous and black people is not only ethical but necessary to ensure the kind of equality neces-sary for a just society. I viewed the state as the Robin Hood that could bring about that justice, and I felt confident in the ability of a democratic society to fulfill a vision of a world in which a person’s voice and rights matter more than the amount of money in his wallet. Had you met me as a freshman, I would have proudly named myself a socialist and a cham-pion of those unheard due to the power structures cur-rently in place. I vividly remember laughing alongside my new Brown peers on how ridiculous any free market-based

A society that employs the voluntary, interdependent forces of the market,

as opposed to the involuntary, coercive forces of the state, best answers the

concerns of the left.

continued | on our responsibility to the poor

white-collar jobs have tremendously hard times finding employers willing to hire them. Those who do find willing employers start pay-ing taxes towards Medicare, Social Security, and public education, most of which benefit higher-income families.

Looking DeeperUnlike much of the college market, in which schools com-pete for student interest, our government grants monopoly power to school districts, hav-ing federal education dollars follow the schools rather than

the students. This lack of competition generates wider dis-parities in educational outcomes. The unhealthiness of much of this country’s cheap food, too, is a result of a long history of government subsi-

dization of corn. By taking money from taxpayers to fund large-scale agri-busi-ness, the government destroyed local, organic, alternative products, and both the employment and the better nutrition that come with them. More broadly, minimum wage laws cre-ate a vicious circle of un-employment for the least fortunate. If a poorly ed-ucated worker can only produce $4 of value per hour and the minimum wage is $8.50, employers cannot legally hire an-other worker unless they plan to be charitable. This incentivizes the mechani-zation of menial jobs and

a minimum wage, such a lack of human capital effectively prices low-income families out of employment opportuni-ties. Some of these people, trying to find ways to pay for family sustenance, are invited by gangs to work selling marijuana, cocaine, heroin, or other hard drugs. In the cur-rent criminal justice system, an overwhelming number of peo-ple are incarcerated and bound into a cycle of recidivism for committing the crime of pos-sessing a drug. Those who do try for college at a four-year institu-tion are not necessarily benefited by affirmative action pol-icies, since these typically award on basis of race and not of class. Those that go on to try to pursue blue-collar and

Our responsibility to the poor is not to coerce others into charity but to create a system whereby the poor have the greatest opportunity to better their

own condition.

We must simply hold ourselves responsible for the betterment of those around us.

6 S opinion

7Sopinion

to the endless safety, immigration, licensing, certification, and health insurance requirements mandated by the state.

III. Our Responsibility to the PoorOur responsibility to the poor is not to coerce others into charity via the state. It is to provide a system whereby the poor have the greatest opportunity to better their condi-tion. It is not more government but less government that will enable these people to self-actualize. Our responsibility to the poor is to find ways to create as much value as possible. As entrepreneurs and par-ticipants in a large-scale global economy, we must always seek ways to create value for consumers—in ways that re-duce the cost of living for all, especially the poor. Lastly, our responsibility to the poor is to hold our individual selves accountable to the betterment of those less fortunate. Instead of feigning generosity with others’ wealth, we must give out of individual charity, as religious leaders from Jesus to Mohammaded have commanded. We must do everything within our power—and nothing beyond it—to assist the poor, needy, and homeless around us.

removes experience-building opportunities from the ré-sumés of these job applicants. The illegality associated with hard drugs makes the drug industry lucrative but violent and dangerous for young teens to participate in. If marijuana is illegal, a drug seller receives a premium for selling it. Without legal means to compete, gangs control market share through black mar-ket means (i.e. turf wars). Furthermore, the tax dollars (of both poor and rich families) that go to public education at the collegiate level overwhelmingly favor upper-middle-income families, sim-ply because a higher fraction of the rich than of the poor attend college—even public college. Since low-income families begin paying Social Se-curity and Medicare taxes earlier, live shorter lives on av-erage, and work for a longer period of time, the returns received from these programs is actually worse for these communities. Given the competitiveness of applicant pools and the incredible expenses that come along with the hiring process, employers are hesitant to hire these kinds of employees, due

The leftism so predominant in third world societies perpetuates the poverty it seeks to alleviate.

involve reasoning, none do so to the extent of mathemat-ics. For, of all disciplines, mathematics assumes the least. Biologists take the laws of chemistry and physics as given; political scientists treat history as given; writers accept lin-guistics as given. Mathematics, on the other hand, starts from scratch. It makes only the most fundamental assump-tions—that A is A, for instance. Nothing else is accepted until it is proven. The effect of such rigorous reasoning on personal achievement has been well documented. In August 2009, The Economist published the results of economist Joshua Goodman’s study on the relationship between taking ex-tra math courses and future income. Goodman reported that black males experience 15 percent increases in annual

income with each math course taken. In the same article were reported the findings of New York University psychology professor Clancy Blair, whose research suggests that mathe-matical calculations “improve

reasoning, problem-solving skills, behavior, and the ability to self-regulate. These skills are associated with the pre-frontal cortex part of the brain, which continues to develop into your early 30s.” If the brain continues to develop at 30, and mathematics improves problem-solving skills, as these studies suggest, then college students are at a prime age to reap the benefits of a mathematics course. The idea that mathematical reasoning is vital to success in other avenues of life is not a recent suggestion. Thousands of years ago, Plato’s Academy in Athens had this inscription above the entrance: “Let no one ignorant of geometry enter here.” The study at the Academy was, for the most part, not mathematical. Yet the philosophers there knew that to argue philosophy, one had to know how to think, and the best way to know how to think is to study mathematics. An objection to a required course in mathemat-ics is that while mathematics might benefit a student, that student would take the mathematics requirement at the ex-pense of another course in his concentration, which might

Few at Brown dare to question the merits of the Open Curriculum. Founded in 1969 (known then as the New Curriculum), the Open Curriculum abol-

ished general education course requirements. Ever since, each student has been left largely free to choose whatever courses he fancies, with three caveats: One must pass at least 30 courses, complete a concentration, and demon-strate competence in writing. The academic world is chock full of critics who disparage the Open Curriculum as lax and unserious. However, I do not write to join their ranks. In my view, the Open Curriculum is superior to either a “core” or a set of “distribution requirements.” My reasons are similar to the arguments given by Brown, so I shall not bore the reader with a repetition of lofty University platitudes. My criticism of the Open Curriculum is its lack of a mathematics requirement. Gasp! Mathematics require-ment?! Yes, I did say that. In every academic field, in every job, and in fact in every situation imaginable, one must reason. Writers must analyze diction and argument. Engineers must analyze materials and machines. You, in reading this article, are performing a countless number of acts of reasoning—ev-erything from the recognition of the words to the compre-hension of their meaning to the formation of an opinion of the argument. Put simply, reasoning is the foundation of all action. We often hear that there are some actions that are “creative” as opposed to “logical.” Some will argue that a painter would be burdened if he had to think about how best to paint, instead of just letting inspiration let him splash colors at random on a blank canvas. But no painter actually paints at random, not even Jackson Pollock. While painting may require very different thoughts than playing chess, both require a thought process. If reasoning underlies all actions, even “creative” actions, then the best preparation for life is to sharpen one’s reasoning. No subject does this better than mathematics. Everything in mathematics must be justified by logical ar-gument; nothing is accepted on faith. While all disciplines

OLIVER HUDSON

revising the open curriculum A requirement in thinking

8 S opinion

If reasoning underlies all actions, even “creative” actions, then the best

preaparation for life is to sharpen one’s reasoning.

9Sopinion

when your employer springs this problem on you. Rather, the point is that you acquire a habit of strong reasoning ability. A third objection is that requirements of any kind are against the spirit of the Open Curriculum. But we have a writing requirement. The mathematics requirement would exist for the same reason the writing one does: Mathemat-ics is a fundamental skill indispensable to all fields. The above argument constitutes a proof of the neces-sity of a mathematics requirement in the Open Curriculum. QED.

actually benefit him more. Though another course in the concentration would be beneficial, learning how to think better is going to have a far greater return than acquiring additional knowledge. Another objection to this proposal runs some-thing like this: “MATH! But wait, I can’t do math.” Yes, that is the point. Facility in mathematics is a sign of robust logical thinking, while difficulty in mathematics is a sign of sloppy logical thinking—a deficiency that is likely drag-ging you down in your field of study. The point is not that one emerges ready to take the derivative of inverse tangent

Kassar House should not be the preserve of mathematical geniuses but a necessary stop for all of us who could stand to improve our reasoning.

Perhaps it’s about time Brown started requiring civics classes. The Brown students who are American citizens are able to vote, and it makes practical sense for American voters to be well-educated about how the American government works. But re-quired classes are antithetical to the academic freedom and fundamentally libertarian philosophy of a Brown ed-ucation. How, then, do we improve our poor civics knowledge without requir-ing civics classes? Think of Brown’s incredibly popular classes—to name a few, ENGN 0090: “Management of Industrial and Nonprofit Organizations,” NEUR 0010: “The Brain: An Introduction to Neuroscience,” CSCI 0150: “Introduc-tion to Object-Oriented Programming and Computer Science,” and, in the olden days, POLS 0220: “City Poli-tics.” What many of these successful and popular classes have in common is dynamic and engaging professors as well as interesting and useful course material. The most popular classes at Brown are competitive in the class market and have their ways of winning over shoppers. The civics class would also have to be engaging. Its syllabus would have to be unique and inter-esting enough to catch shoppers’ at-tention, and a professor with a knack for breathing life into early Ameri-can history would have to teach it. A successful, well-attended first semes-ter would cement the civics course’s status as must-shop—and hopefully must-take.

You’re proud to go to Brown, aren’t you? You revel in our open curriculum and its ac-

companying academic freedom and brag to your friends about our strong academic programs. But how would you feel if I told you Brown students know very little about civics? In 2007, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute administered a ba-sic American history, foreign affairs, economics, and government exam to

14,000 college students—half fresh-men, half seniors—at 50 different schools. The average score for fresh-men was 50.4 percent, but seniors did not do much better, with an average score of 54.2 percent. While the selec-tive schools (such as Brown) surveyed in the study had higher average scores than the randomly selected schools did, students’ civics knowledge did not increase much between freshman and senior years. You might intuit that Brown, with its activist student popu-lation, would have scored well on the exam, but no—Brown’s scores ranked 47th out of the 50 schools. Isn’t that a little embarrassing? Brown students champion their polit-ical causes by protesting and demon-strating yet are not well informed about the foundations of American politics.

OLIVIA CONETTA

S opinion10

a civics fix for Brown

But a course that focuses only on the Founding Fathers and the Constitution would be reductive, for the history of the United States is much richer than merely the his-tory of its government. Many Brown students would rightfully take issue with the course if it did not consider the roles of Native Americans, poor free men, slaves, servants, women, and the like in shaping the beginnings of the United States. For this reason, I suggest that the class include in its syllabus some readings from Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, which provides a background of American history from the perspective

of marginalized groups (and is a great read to boot). A qualified professor, an interesting syllabus, and readings from Zinn’s book are the ingredients for a civics class with high demand and par-ticipation. Hopefully, on your next school break after taking this class, you can tell your friends how lucky you are to go to Brown—not just because of the open curriculum, but because you have used it to make yourself a more well-informed citizen.

aetaaaaeeeeeeeeeeeeeeIn an exam testing college

students on basic knowledge of American civics, Brown’s

scores ranked 47th out of the 50 schools’ scores.

aetaaaaeeeeeeeeeeeeeeSince required classes are

antithetical to the philosophy of a Brown education, we need a unique, interesting,

and popular civics class with a cemented reputation as a must-shop—and, hopefully,

must-take.

11Sopinion

ALEX DRECHSLER

claims as we should any other political issue: analytically and as objectively as possible. Here’s the argument: In Providence’s current economic crisis, Brown, as much a part of Providence as its home-owning citizens or local fire department employees, should increase its monetary con-tributions to the city, especially considering the real estate tax breaks it receives. This appears to be a benign request, at least on its face. Unfortunately, this request is oftentimes mud-

dled by emotionally charged political rhetoric—claims by Providence Firefighters Local 799 Vice President Philip Fiore that Brown’s tax-exempt sta-tus is “disgusting” and an “in-justice” or insistence by Brown student Tara Kane Prendergast

’12.5 that Brown should “pay its fair share.” Brown is not spared biased criticism from Mayor Angel Taveras either, who claimed that taxpayers “subsidize” Brown—connoting that Providence taxpayers’ money goes to the institution when, of course, this is not the situation. What has gained national attention is not simply Providence’s near-bank-ruptcy, but the singling out of Brown as its culprit. By its very nature, political rhetoric such as that mentioned

It seems nowadays that Americans have something of a penchant (or, perhaps more descriptively, an insatia-ble desire) for populist-style villainization of anything

successful. Tea Party or Occupy, Republican or Demo-crat, it appears to be en vogue today to dole out emotional rhetoric attacking those in power as by nature immoral, undesirable, or inequitable in comparison to the “average, hard-working American,” regardless of the merits of their individual success. Of course, ever the critical conspiracy theorists, Brown students have a soft spot for these politi-cally charged and often base-less accusations. However, in an ironic twist of fate, Brown has recently found itself as the receiver rather than giver of populist, class-warfare-style at-tack—specifically due to its tax-exempt status as a not-for-profit institution of Providence. Of course, even the anti-populist must not dis-regard a criticism simply because it is populist in nature. Sometimes—some would argue even oftentimes—a pop-ulist argument may ultimately prove to have its merits in attacking an unfair practice of our society’s status quo. And so we owe it to those attacking Brown to look at their

part of the solution A look at Brown’s responsibility to Providence

With Providence nearly bankrupt, populists on all sides have chosen unfairly to single out Brown as its culprit. Mayor Taveras even claims that the city “subsidizes”

Brown, when in fact the opposite is true.

$9.2 B + 0.3 Bannually

$2.5 B

RHODE ISLAND’S STATE DEBT

BROWN’S ENDOWMENT

$295 M

$600 M

KILLING THE GOOSE

BROWN’S TOTAL ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION TO THE

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, 2011 (EST).

RHODE ISLANDDEFICIT, 2011

The insolvency plaguing Providence, and Rhode Island in general, cannot be solved by raiding University coffers. Furthermore, Providence depends on a vibrant Brown for much of its economic well-being: claiming one in twenty of the city’s workers, our school is Providence’s second-largest employer. And since, as a non-profit, Brown’s endowment is built on voluntary alumni donations, what do you think would come of it in the event of compulsory contributions to Rhode Island’s unfunded pensions?

WOULD YOU DONATE TO THE GIVE RETIRED COPS FREE TRIPS TO FLORIDA FUND?

12 opinion

Of course, these figures do not capture the entire picture of Brown’s contributions to its city because it ne-glects priceless intangibles. Add to these figures worldwide recognition, immeasurable economic activity, infrastruc-ture investments, community engagement and activism, and human capital. We must also include specifics like the employment and economic activity created by alumni living in the city, students who volunteer in Rhode Island schools and food banks, or research and expertise spurred by the Knowledge District. A few other facts should be noted. For one, Brown holds an infinitesimal portion of Providence’s tax-exempt land, which is spread between various nonprofits like pri-vate schools and hospitals. Yet the national attention (and accompanying resentment) has been targeted nearly exclu-sively at Brown. Of course, it is not difficult to reason why Brown has been singled out, given the lens of populist anger.

above is subjective and, as is often the case, a mere opinion. So here are some facts about our disgusting, un-fair, selfish institution:

FACT Brown pays $2.5 million in voluntary payments annually to Providence.FACT Brown pays $1.5 million in property taxes annually to Providence.FACT Brown pays $2.1 million in fees annually to Providence.FACT Brown provides Rhode Island with 8,200 jobs.FACT Brown generates nearly $600 million annually in total economic output in Rhode Island. FACT Brown has recently contributed $250,000 in grants to Providence public schools.FACT Brown grants over $4.1 million in scholarships and financial aid to Rhode Island students.

continued | part of the solution

S12

Let’s think twice before handing yet more of our funds over to the politicians whose mismanagement and corruption have brought the beautiful city of Providence to the brink of default.

13Sopinion

that Providence pays $1 mil-lion to out-of-state pension recipients every month. Last year alone, almost $14 mil-lion left the state in pension money, and this does not even include health benefits. According to other reports, some pension recipients are receiving twice or even three times as much money each year than they actually made on the job. Not only are these statis-tics mind-bogglingly ridic-ulous, but it flies in the face of logic that a nonprofit with

a mission of academic enrichment should dole out its precious funds toward out-of-state pension plans. Is that “fair,” to borrow some political rhetoric? A solution I endorse is that Brown contribute funds to the city but on the condition that Brown have a say in how it is used and applied. This arrangement would allow Brown to expand its mission statement by contributing toward pol-

icies it supports, such as Provi-dence’s flailing public education system. Assuming this proposal gains any traction, we will see how Providence and Brown’s op-ponents deal with this apparent loophole in their requests.

In a statement on the issue, Mayor Taveras said the following: “I do not believe that Brown should solve our problems, but I do believe that Brown should be part of the solution.” I support this position wholeheartedly. How-ever, a blank check signed by the University is not a part of the solution—it is simply a Band-Aid on the budget and a bow to the unsubstantiated criticisms of Brown. Being part of the solution means being an active, appreciated mem-ber of the city, upholding true standards of fairness and responsibility.

Yet there is another, more nuanced defense for Brown’s hesitation to provide voluntary funding, one that failed to reach the media hype of other explanations. It all comes down to the fundamental reason why these great insitutions are tax-exempt in the first place. It is because these not-for-profit institutions exist primarily for the ben-efit of the community (or even, in Brown’s case, society in general). They serve an unusually noble mission state-ment and do not make a profit from which taxes can easily be extracted. Any funds that are funneled away from Brown will work towards the University’s detriment and limit its ability to reach its upmost potential in its noble goal of academic enrichment. This is especially true given the context of the budget deficit debate. Because Brown is a nonprofit, it puts every cent it receives towards upholding its mission statement. On the contrary, any dol-lar that goes towards the city can be used for any purpose, even if this purpose contradicts Brown’s mission statement. Specifically, reports have recently brought attention to the inordinate size of pensions paid to public workers, many of which funnel away the city’s funds towards retire-ment in the Sunshine State. Reports have even indicated

Non-profits are tax-exempt for good reasons. Would you pay the pensions by defunding our state’s hospitals?

A blank check signed by the University is not a part of the solution—it is simply a Band-Aid on the budget and a bow to

unsubstantiated criticisms of Brown.

14 S opinion

comes to $125 per user. And clearly, if a majority of those 800 million users are not worth that $125, others have to be worth more. Is personal information really worth so much? For advertisers, yes—Facebook is a gold mine. Be-cause Facebook provides a platform for liberally sharing personal information, advertisers no longer have to guess what you want—they know. The advertisements that appear on the side of your homepage announcing Bruce Spring-steen tickets or car deals are probably a result of you liking Bruce Springsteen on your profile or visiting BMW’s Face-book page. These advertisements suggest that the advertis-ing industry has elevated itself to a standard where access to social networking data is invaluable to the accuracy of ad-vertisement targeting. In a way, by the amount your Face-

book information is filtered and processed, your Facebook profile serves as much a con-sumer profile as a social profile. Optimistically, I believe most of Facebook’s users are somewhat aware of the appli-cability of their information

to advertising, though it is easy to lose sight of that in the unrestricted efficiency which so characterizes the site as a whole. There is a certain magic in the liberal exchange of personal data that defines social networking: Users share data, Facebook receives it, and advertisers sell it. All parties are satisfied. Advertising highlights one opportunity of capital-izing on the social network, though the potential for oppor-tunities like these in Facebook’s future is hard to predict. The result is that the speculative location of my shared per-sonal information is uncertain. From a metaphysical stand-point, because my personal information is Facebook’s asset, does this imply that when shares of Facebook are publicly bought and sold, my personal information is being publicly bought and sold? One would not like to think so. But this is the kind of question users have to ask themselves. Face-book is a new kind of beast, and its users must be aware of the potency Facebook has for valuing their public personal information.

This February, social network giant Facebook filed for what is expected to be the largest IPO in Silicon Valley’s history. With this $5 billion debut, Face-

book’s market value will likely increase to between $75 bil-lion and $100 billion. To put that in perspective, a market share of this magnitude would place Facebook in a venerable position among some of the most successful companies across all industries. The bookends of $75 billion and $100 billion estimate Facebook to be just above Walt Disney at $71 bil-lion and potentially equivalent to McDonald’s at $101 bil-lion, according to Standard and Poor’s as of February 1. At this valuation, Facebook would be worth dramatically more than eBay and Goldman Sachs, at $41 and $58 bil-lion, respectively. Yet Facebook would still be shadowed by en-terprises such as Google and Apple, at $188 and $425 billion. Although some are skeptical of Facebook’s future success as a publicly traded company, Ke-vin Landis, the portfolio man-ager of Firsthand Technology Value Fund and an owner of shares in the currently privately held Facebook, points to the potential of the company: “Facebook will have more traffic than anyone else, and they’ll have more data than anyone else… So, unless they are impervious to learning how to monetize that data, they should be the most valu-able property on the Internet, eventually.” The anticipation of Facebook’s IPO presents an op-portunity to reassess how Facebook has realized its stand-ing as an Internet stronghold. For one, the role of its now 800 million users must be acknowledged. After all, their in-teractions turn the gears of the social network. Nick Bilton lobbies for their cause in his New York Times article “Face-book Users Ask, ‘Where’s Our Cut?’” in which he makes the valid point that “Facebook is the first real social-media public offering where the content on the site is entirely cre-ated by its users.” Now if one were to appropriate the $100 billion mar-ket value to each of Facebook’s 800 million users, the average

J. P. HARE

Facebook, worth approximately $100 billion, is the first substantial social medium whose content is created entirely by users. $125 per user—is personal information

really worth so much?

my lifeis your asset?

15Sadver tisement

minorities. Yet race-based affirmative action flies in the face of this logic. The statement made by a policy of race-based affirmative action is that every member of a minor-ity group is inherently prone to poverty—that somehow, solely because you were born with a certain skin color, we must treat you differently. This policy appears archaic in that it indicates that every individual of a minority group is innately different because of his or her race or skin color. What becomes further meddled in the confla-tion of poverty and race is that there are alternatives to race-based affirmative action that are conveniently over-looked. This issue is not an all-or-nothing scenario where

the elimination of affirmative action will automatically trig-ger a buildup of the ultra-af-fluent on college campuses at the expense of those who were born with a deficit of opportu-nity. Specifically, I propose that race-based affirmative action

be replaced entirely with a socioeconomic status-based affirmative action system that awards any applicant who has had difficulties and obstacles such as those mentioned earlier. Thus, this system will provide a more just advan-tage to the disadvantaged. My proposal is not so much a repudiation of affirmative action but instead a compro-mise between its opponents and proponents. Specifically, it will eliminate the need to differentiate based on race and will focus entirely on the merit of the applicant, which of course takes into consideration the availability of opportu-nities. If it is true that members of minority groups tend to come from poorer and more underprivileged families, this policy will work to their advantage. What is most significant about this policy is that it ensures fairness in admissions. It is inherently unfair for a rich black student to receive an advantage over a poor white student. This is also not at all a rare situation. In place of this injustice, a socioeconomic status-based affirmative action system will treat all races as equals and assess their applications simply based on their respective merit, as a function of their opportunities (or lack thereof). On the

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to hear again a case on race-based affirmative action, perhaps it is time for us as students to reconsider the efficacy

of this widespread policy beyond its constitutionality. Re-gardless of one’s own ideological and emotional biases, the reality is that there is in fact an extremely unfortunate mi-nority achievement gap that has led a sizable portion of certain minority groups to be undereducated and under-privileged. Actions taken to rectify this situation and ex-pand social and economic opportunities are not only noble but also necessary for the betterment of our society. I am supportive of actions taken to help those who have not received the same resources or opportunities as many others. This is especially true for America’s underprivi-leged youth, who, at the luck of the draw, have been born into families that cannot provide them with the resources, finan-cial and otherwise, to succeed. Even taken at face value, it is logical for an admissions officer to take these factors into consideration. Normally, admissions should be based solely on merit. The implication of this statement is that someone who was raised with fewer opportunities should be given more credence to their innate merit, intellect, and hard work. There are many factors that must be taken into consideration—if the person could not afford new books or computers or tutors; if their parents provided no emo-tional encouragement or may have even been emotionally, verbally, or physically abusive; if they learned English late in life; or if they grew up in a neighborhood where suc-cess was discouraged and where educational facilities were lackluster. If a person overcame such obstacles to achieve the same results of someone who did not have these same challenges, then the first applicant surely has demonstrated more merit than the second. Yet what is important, and where proponents and opponents of affirmative action diverge, is the conflation between poverty and race. Of course, it is clear that not all minorities are poor and that not all poor people are

ALEX DRECHSLER

colorblind Reconsidering race-based affirmative action

16 S opinion

If a person overcame such obstacles to achieve the same results of someone who did not have these same challenges, then

the first applicant surely has demonstrated more merit than the second.

17Sopinion

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Let us stand for equal-ity, break down the barriers

erected between races, and treat each individual with col-orblind lenses by assessing exclusively their merits and personal character.

other side of the coin, the sys-tem will eliminate discrimina-tion in applications entirely be-cause it could mask the reader from the race of the individual. Without knowledge of the ap-plicant’s race, the reader will be able to read the application in an unbiased manner and thus they can only consider that person’s merits. I am reminded of the famous and of-ten-repeated lines of the visionary Martin Luther King Jr.:

Brown’s admissions team could simply give preference to the disadvantaged, instead of to minority groups.

The statement made by a policy of race-based affirmative action is that somehow,

solely because you were born with a certain skin color, you are helpless on your

own; we must treat you differently.

heavy with regret, people from all over the country at-tacked his character. There is a Facebook group titled “Joe Paterno is just as guilty as Jerry Sandusky.” I would ques-tion the moral judgment of anyone who sincerely believes Paterno’s actions were on par with those of a child rapist. Let’s look at some of the highlights of Paterno’s life just as the Penn State students who mourned the death of one of their heroes did. With 409 wins, he is the only coach in NCAA Division I-A to break 400 wins. His team

was undefeated in five separate years and partic-ipated in 37 bowl games, of which they won 24. Penn State foot-ball players have also been recog-nized for their academic perfor-mance under his leadership. P a t e r n o encouraged ath-letes to prioritize their academ-ics. Through a conviction he brought from Brown, Paterno advocated “not football that puts

winning first, but first-class football played by students who put first-class lives first.” Paterno also donated more than $4 million and helped raise $14 million to fund a li-brary at Penn State. Joe Paterno’s involvement in the Sandusky scan-dal proves that he is not perfect. He is only human, which makes all his achievements all the more impressive. I am proud to call Joe Paterno a Brown alum. May he rest in peace.

It is easy to play Monday morning quarterback, using our 20/20 hindsight to question what someone else did or did not do in a delicate situation. Such ques-

tioning of Joe Paterno’s (’50) actions have forever tarnished the reputation of a legend. In 2002, graduate assistant Mike McQueary in-formed Paterno that he observed former defensive coordi-nator Jerry Sandusky fondling a young boy in the shower. Paterno reported the incident to his immediate superior, athletic director Tim Curley, and to Gary Schultz, former vice pres-ident of Penn-sylvania State University. When asked by Sally Jenkins of the Washington Post why he failed to report the inci-dent any further than that, Pa-terno responded, “I didn’t know exactly how to handle it and I was afraid to do something that might jeopardize what the univer-sity procedure was. So I backed away and turned it over to some other people, people I thought would have a little more expertise than I did. It didn’t work out that way.” Should Paterno have followed up more thor-oughly, perhaps by personally contacting the police? Pa-terno would agree that he should have. Does that mean we should remember Paterno primally by his involvement in the scandal? I would say no. Even as Paterno slowly died from cancer, heart

18 S opinion

KELLY FENNESSY

how should we remember Joe Paterno?

19Sar ts & style

MACLAIN CHRISTIE

RATING

ALBUM TITLE

ARTIST

LABEL

GENRE

Grouplove

Grouplove

Atlantic

Alternative

music review: Grouplove

Grouplove is like sweet potato pie, surpris-ingly sweet. And like

sweet potato pie, if done right, it can remind you that you are actually eating something made from a sweet potato, which ac-tually is not that sweet. Grouplove doesn’t push the envelope in any musically exciting ways with their recent album Grouplove, but they do seem to bring a fresh smell to the normal rock instrumenta-tion. The female vocal harmo-nies make this self-titled album sweet when it would otherwise be pretty salty. When listening to the album, your favorite song is likely going to be the first one you hear, “Colours.” The clever vocals just tickle your ear-drums, and the song has a rous-ing chorus that makes it almost irresistible to sing along. The chorus has just enough pop to make the song catchy, but it’s inventive enough that it avoids being cliched. That said, the following few tracks—“Naked Kids,” “Gold Coast,” and, actu-ally, all the rest—are a little dis-appointing. If you need some more spice, go check out their other releases, which don’t lack lovable songs.

LAU

GH

N

OW

cry

late

rca

rtoo

ns p

rovi

ded

by u

sbic

ef

20 S ar ts & style

21Sar ts & style

USCCB UCS

winners & losers

Over these past few months, the US Con-ference of Catholic Bishops, and other

Catholics through-out the country, have flexed con-siderable political muscle. Starting with the Depart-ment of Health and Human Services birth control man-date, the Catholic Church was able to push a major viola-

tion of religious rights to the forefront of the national political debate. They made President Obama look like a fool when his White House staff attempted to tell the Church to reverse 2,000-year-old teach-ings on sexuality and brought to light that as the HHS religious exemption only ap-plied to organizations employing a major-ity of workers of the same faith, it forced organizations to choose between discrim-inating against workers or violating their religious beliefs. The president was hum-bled in front of a national audience and potentially lost millions of Catholic voters, all in the effort to make instutions value a $10 monthly copay over their religious freedom. This election cycle, the world’s oldest institution is showing it still has

some political clout in the U.S.

We once thought power-hungry politicians and general government incompetence were reserved for Washington. Kudos to Brown’s Undergraduate Council of Stu-dents for proving us wrong. On Feb. 9, UCS announced a problem in their ability to function: a strained and increasingly com-petitive relationship with the student gov-ernment’s funding arm, the Undergraduate Finance Board, that deprived UCS of their (supposedly) much-needed funds. Their solution: cooperation, discussion, or bipar-tisanship? No: instead, the UCS executive board hastily coerced the general body to pass the dramatic and historically uncom-mon option of a constitutional amendment consolidating UCS’s power to fund it-se l f—something no other student group on campus can do—effectively removing any in-stitutional checks or balances on UCS. As could have been expected, the amendment caused an uproar not only among UFB members but among Brown students in general and failed ultimately failed to pass in the re-quired student body referendum. Well played, UCS, well played.