The events of Jan. 6, 2021 need no introduction. A month ago, the nation and the rest of the free world watched in horror as the Capitol building was breached by a fanatical Trump-supporting mob that sought to overturn an election and execute several elected officials. In the aftermath, five people, including a Capitol police officer, died, and hundreds more were injured. Several high-ranking cabinet members resigned, and representatives and senators both Republican and Democrat strongly condemned the riots, explicitly placing the blame for the incitement of the irate horde on the shoulders of former President Donald Trump himself. Trump and his repeated, unsubstantiated claims of election fraud stoked the fear, anger and prejudice of millions. Unfortunately, this is where the unity ended. In order to both prevent the spread of dangerous election-related conspiracy theories and the future planning of violent terror, nearly every social media platform, from Twitter to TikTok, banned former President Trump and suspended the accounts of thousands of his supporters. One platform in particular, the right-leaning, “free speech”-supporting Parler, was deplatformed entirely, with the App Store and Google Play Store banning its presence, and Amazon Web Services refusing to host its servers.
In one of the final dialogues of “Antigone,” the third play in Sophocles’ epic Oedipus Cycle, the blind fortune teller Tiresias has some choice advice for his king, Creon of Thebes. As Creon is deciding his niece Antigone’s fate after she illegally buried her brother Polynices, he struggles to balance the urge to appear strong before his people — who had recently emerged from two long, bloody conflicts — and to understand that Antigone’s crime was committed out of love and religious duty rather than seditious defiance. Creon, choosing the former, imprisons Antigone in a stone crypt despite her romantic infatuation with his son.
Several weeks ago, I had the privilege of collaborating on the writing of an editorial discussing Sodexo’s recent insertion of special dining pamphlets into various dining locations around campus. At first glance, the pamphlets seemed to be encouraging a healthier diet, instructing students on how to build plates that maintained appropriate portion sizes, how to use water as a means of suppressing one’s appetite and secretly physically exert oneself doing mundane tasks in order to burn calories. Evidently, these seemingly harmless pamphlets encourage weight loss, something many attempting to have a healthier lifestyle do not seek to do.
We have been thrown into a brand new decade, complete with its fair share of disasters. Two days after celebrating the New Year, the hashtag #ww3, or World War 3, was trending on Twitter. This trend was in response to the abrupt killing of a high-ranking Iranian general, Qassem Soleimani, an action that the United States promptly took responsibility for. Understandably, this enraged both the Iranian government and its people, with the Supreme Leader and numerous parliamentary figures promising “harsh revenge” for the United States and its allies.
On Nov. 7, Chlöe Swarbrick, a 25-year-old lawmaker, was delivering a speech in front of the New Zealand Parliament in favor of the Zero Carbon Bill, a piece of legislation designed to set a target for the country to be at zero carbon emissions by 2050. During her speech, Swarbrick was heckled by an unidentified older member of Parliament, whereupon she nonchalantly responded with the phrase “Ok, Boomer,” seeming to acknowledge, but parry the attacking verbiage of her detractor. Swarbrick’s choice of words here could be perceived as quite intriguing, as she was clearly referencing a viral meme referring to baby boomers, a generation of Americans and Western Europeans born in the two decades of economic prosperity and abundance following the Second World War.
I have been at Brandeis for over a year now, and I’ve taken my fair share of good and bad classes. I’ve sat in lecture halls that felt electrified by passionate professors and students, with subject matters more interesting and entertaining than some of my favorite movies. The opposite has also been true, and I’ve found myself thinking that going to certain classes wasn’t even necessary. I have thought to myself, “maybe I should have consulted other students’ opinions and thoughts on said classes and professors before enrolling, or at least shop it before spending hundreds of dollars on used, rented textbooks.” I became wary of which classes I signed up for, almost to the point of paranoia; what if a class is required for my major or University requirement, and I’m unable to pass it due to either a teaching style that I can’t follow, or some incomprehensible, poorly-explained material?
If you have been paying attention to the news recently, you’ve likely seen numerous headlines from numerous major news outlet regarding 16-year-old Greta Thunberg and her international protest movement, which is centered around combating climate change and its effects on a global scale. Thunberg, who hails from Stockholm, Sweden, rose to international prominence in 2018. Then, she spent her days outside of the Swedish Parliament demanding stronger action on global warming, holding a sign which declared, “School strike for climate.” Depictions of Thunberg’s valiant protests went viral, and her address to the 2018 United Nations Climate Change Conference sparked worldwide protests against inaction on the part of world leaders in the face of an unprecedented existential threat. Those protests were primarily led by students seeking to emulate Thunberg’s actions — many walked out of school in a similar fashion.
This particular submitter sent me a rather lengthy article on — what they perceived to be — the worthlessness of a liberal arts degree from most universities due to subjects in the humanities being “bathed in political leftism.” The individual claimed that anyone who majors in these subjects is a fool and not worth hiring. The article went on at length regarding how young college students have been brainwashed into hating America and “American values,” and that this mass persuasion is begetting a generation of college graduates wholly unaware of the many facets of American civil and intellectual life.
In the discussion that occurs within the United States over the tragic humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, recent talk has been about whether the United States will intervene militarily and overthrow the dictator Nicolas Maduro, whose reign has contributed more than anything to the widespread starvation, thirst and disease being most Venezuelans are experiencing. When considering the plight of the Venezuelan people, who have been deprived of many things people in bordering countries deem commonplace, an interesting scenario arises. One can ask, what would happen if the people in another country, say the United States, were deprived of this vital infrastructure?
In the grand scheme of the vast American media landscape, the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, while an undeniably vicious hate crime that claimed the lives of 11 congregants and injured several others, has already become old news. Naturally, nearly every individual of some prominence in the United States has spoken about not only the genuinely evil violence associated with this crime, but also the underlying bigotry and anti-Semitism expressed by the perpetrator.