OCR Text |
Show 4 Thursday April 17, 2014 OPINION www.dailyutahchronicle.com LUIGI GHERSI/The Daily Utah Chronicle Ukraine conflict could help U.S. natural gas market JACKSON HANNON Columnist ohn Mearsheimer wrote in 1990, that he was certain that we were "likely soon to regret the passing of the Cold War." While I person ally did not live through the Cold War — nor do I wish I had, especially given the eternal fear of nuclear winter — there is something to be J said for the chilling relations between Russia and the Western world. The idea that Russia is our biggest geopolitical foe is an exaggeration at best, but growing tensions between Russia and Europe can only help the nascent American natural gas industry, as well as strengthen ties between the United States and our European allies. The natural gas industry in the U.S. has been making a fierce comeback as of late, especially thanks to the high demand brought about by the polar vortex on the East coast. However, to assume that this trend will continue, especially if prices continue to rise, is unlikely, said Miranda Davis in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. She fears that if the high prices for natural gas continue, energy companies will switch to the cheaper alternative — coal. Exporting gas to Europe can offer potential business growth. As Russian-planned actions and motivations in Ukraine, especially the eastern part of the nation, remain unclear, questions have been raised about the security of Europe's energy supply, which has relied on a large amount of Russian natural gas in the past. However, Bernstein Research recently released a note stating that the Ukrainian gas network is of far less importance than it has been in the past, thanks to expanded and better developed infrastructure. Even ignoring the energy side of the Ukrainian conflict, that issue has led to stronger ties between NATO members, with many Eastern European member states requesting more forces be deployed to their states. I previously wrote a column where I argued that there is no war for the U.S. in Ukraine, and I still argue that we have no interest in a war. There's nothing to be gained by going to war with Russia, but even still, better cooperation with NATO allies in Eastern Europe is never something to dismiss out of hand. As long as Russia continues to act menacingly or in ways that are difficult for their neighbors to interpret, the U.S. stands to gain by remaining calm and rational. We should welcome this opportunity to craft closer ties with our historical allies in Western Europe as well as more recent allies in former Soviet satellite states in Eastern Europe. letters@chronicle.utah.edu LETTER TO THE EDITOR ACA doesn't violate the U.S. Constitution Editor, If Andrew Szuhay is going to quote the Constitution (April 16, "Obamacare a clear violation of Article II, 1st Amendment") he should at least get it right. "An" versus "the" makes quite a difference in the meaning of the First Amendment. Szuhay should also take a day and read the Affordable Care Act. Nowhere does it require a person to go against his or her religious beliefs and use birth control, and it certainly doesn't require Catholics to use birth control. If it did, then that would be a clear violation of the First Amendment. But as it stands, merely offering coverage for birth control in no way infringes on the rights of a member of the Catholic Church to not use birth control. The ACA also offers no barrier to the Catholic Church or anyone or any organization, when they discourage the use of contraceptives by exercising their First Amendment right of free speech. On the contrary, offering a religious exemption from the ACA is what would be a violation of the First Amendment. If such an exemption is upheld by the Supreme Court and written into law, then we would clearly have Congress writing a law respecting an establishment of religion. There is plenty to criticize about the ACA, but saying that it violates the Establishment Clause is ridiculous. Szuhay ends his column with a suggestion that the ACA is too much government and that we need a lessening of the influence of government in our lives. While I am certainly sympathetic with the latter sentiment, I'm curious as to what Szuhay thinks is the right amount of government in our lives? When the egregious practices of health insurance companies become so great, and the companies themselves hold so much power, at what point does it become necessary for government to intervene to protect its citizenry? Steve Corey Sophomore, pre-math Letters to the editor should be sent to letters@chronicle.utah.edu. Letters should be few- er than 350 words and must include the writer's name. Letters from students should also include the writer's major and year in school. Letters from U faculty and staff should include department and title. Letters from alumni should include the year the writer graduated. All other letters must include the sender's name and city of residence. All letters become property of The Daily Utah Chronicle and may be edited for style, length and content. WHITE -MARC FLOOD AMERICA • ARASH TADJIKI/The Daily Utah Chronicle White privilege demonstrates racial inequality SAM KNUTH p _40 Columnist ublic outrage was at a fever pitch earlier this year over a fairly unobtrusive comic who touched on a controversial subject. According to several articles covering the issue, including one from Buzzfeed, the artist — 19-year-old Jamie Kapp and received a slew of negative comments, including death threats, after posting her original art on Tumblr. This is the second time in my recent memory that a comic has drawn such negative — possibly lethal attention. The first incident was the infamous Danish comic strip depicting Muhammad, invoking great ire from certain sects of the world Muslim community. Kapp's comic touched on the apparently sore issue of white privilege. The comic was meant to serve as a friendly, unassuming explanation of white privilege to its primary beneficiaries. For those unaware, white privilege is a simple concept to grasp. Despite all effort by legislative bodies during the civil rights movement to bring about racial equality, institutionalized discrimination still occurs in which "white people" are the recipients of its benefits and "people of color" are not. Racism, while legally abolished by the United States government, is still pervasive today. For those of you ready to curse me as a "racist," or my favorite epithet "reverse-racist," allow me to clarify the situation. I will never make an assumption on someone's ideology based on the (arbitrary) designation of "race." The amount of melanin in your skin in no way reflects what you believe. But I, and many in this country, are declared white and therefore receive white privilege, whether we want to or not. Some examples might be necessary. After all, the privileged are usually the most blind to their elevated place in society. A study released in our own university in 2013 reported the unfair treatment of "people of color" in Salt Lake County. According to the study, white people were disproportionately approved for home loans — with a 70 percent approval rating across the economic spectrum — whereas Latino approval ratings never topped 6o percent, even at the highest income levels. That is just one example, but there are many more to draw from. Whites are significantly less likely to be jailed for a drug-related offense, even though studies show drug usage is equal across racial boundaries. But even more than that, white privilege can extend to seemingly innocuous activities like shopping. There is a famous case where Barney's, a high-end clothing store chain in New York, was caught disproportionately accosting black customers after leaving the store, including having police ask them for their receipts. Some would call this racial profiling. Well, so would I. But as a beneficiary of white privilege, I generally don't have to worry about such things. I'm able to go about ordinary business without fear of such prejudices. Furthermore, I have never had to worry about my race when it comes to getting a job. Another report released in 2003 showed that as a white individual, even with a criminal record, I am more likely to receive a job over a black candidate without a criminal record who has the same qualifications. Is this article spurring you to rain death threats and curses upon me? If so, then congratulations, you are part of the ignorant masses who attacked a 19-year-old girl whose crime was to put these sentiments into the visual medium. However, I hope that this rather spurs you to discussion, to examine your life and the lives of those you know. If you are white, then hopefully it will cause you to become more critical and sensitive when dealing with matters of race. If you are a person of color, hopefully it will give you insight into an unwitting participant in a system outside of our control. I think white privilege is wrong and terrible, but the only way to end it is through discussion and education. letters@chronicle.utah.edu |