TSW Journal Apr-May 2011

THE SCHOOL OF WASHINGTON
Volume I No . 5
Journ al
A PR I L - M AY 2 0 1 1
A GWU Student Publication SchoolofWashington.org A Product of TSWCN
Economics & Finance

The Future of Nuclear Energy in the Wake of Japan .................................................................................. 4 Fork in the Road .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Investing: Coinstar Inc. ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Mining Investments Around the Corner ........................................................................................................6
Science & Philosophy
A Specter is Haunting Humanity: The Political Psychology of Change ................................................ 6 Religion and Truth .............................................................................................................................................. 8 Same Sex Marriage and Civil Rights ............................................................................................................. 9 Justice or Resentment ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Buying Your Ballot ............................................................................................................................................. 11 Free Speech ........................................................................................................................................................... 12 The Russian Republic ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Mandate of Heaven: The Quing Restoration Organization ....................................................................... 14 Palestine is Nowhere: Prospects of a Third Intifada ................................................................................... 16 Final Four NBA Style ......................................................................................................................................... 17 March Madness 2011 .......................................................................................................................................... 18 Two Strikes and He Quits! Mannys Out ....................................................................................................... 18
Politics
Sports
Culture & Arts

A Case for American Art .................................................................................................................................. 19 Gastronomy Under Attack ................................................................................................................................ 20 Lights! Camera! Fashion! .................................................................................................................................. 21 Selling Exclusivity: How the Acquisition of Hermes Could Spell Disaster .......................................... 22 The Jefferson Hotels Sommelier ..................................................................................................................... 23
Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne
www.schoolofwashington.org
- Follow Us Online -
Our organization thrives on talent. We are always looking for new writers to share their writing and passion with the GW community. If you believe you possess the talent required to write for us, send an email to theschoolofwashington@gmail.com to set up an interview.
- Advertisement for New Writers -
The individual and differing views presented by the individual writers of this organization do not speak for the writers of this organization as a whole. This organization seeks to promote and endorse thought by students, not a specific agenda or standpoint.
- Disclaimer -
Conditum Anno Domini MMX
The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l
E c o n o m i c s & Fi n a n c e
The Future of Nuclear Energy in the Wake of Japan
By Julian Gindi Many people have been analyzing the economic costs of the recent tsunami in Japan but not much emphasis has been put on the economic costs of the partial meltdown of the Fukhishima nuclear energy plant. While the monetary loss from the partial meltdown will only constitute a small percentage of the overall cost from the disaster. The fear of nuclear power, however, which has swept the world, may cost a whole lot more in the future. Nuclear power is one of the most effective current forms of clean energy that powers a significant chunk of the world. The US alone receives 20% of its energy from nuclear sources, more than all other forms of clean energy combined. As society looks toward a cleaner future, nuclear energy will need to be a significant part of that future but since the partial meltdown, support has dropped significantly and nations have been scrapping plans for expansions of their nuclear infrastructure. This will have a significant impact on our energy future and may prolong our dependence on unsustainable energy sources until a viable safe option presents itself. Lets compare nuclear energy to coal, the most common source of energy around the world. The average cost of building a nuclear plant is significantly more expensive to build than a coal or gas plant. The cost of natural gas and coal, however, in itself is a more
4
expensive input. Natural gas and coal also generate negative externalities, which are difficult to price, that negatively affect the health of those near and downwind from such power plants; these costs are rarely factored into the comparison of energy sources. Other such uncertainties such as the cost of climate change and cost of environmental damage complicate the comparison of the real cost of various energy sources. If a price is put on emissions from coal plants (in the form of an emissions tax) nuclear becomes the cheapest source of energy. Consumers, by nature, cannot realize future costs or other such costs than cannot be immediately realized. Consumers, also by nature, are fearful. When they hear dramatic stories of how Japan is frantically trying to prevent total meltdown, they dont think about the negative externalities of coal plants or climate change, they simply worry that such an event will happen near them. A comparison of deaths from each form of energy reveals a striking hole in peoples fear of nuclear power. From 1969-2000 there have only been a total of 31 deaths from nuclear power. During the same time period 18,000 people died from coal powered plants. This number is not even including deaths as a result of pollution are health problems caused by pollution. Many people are scared of the risk of elevated levels of radiation in the event of a total meltdown, which has only happened once in history in Chernobyl which represented a complete failure to follow the guidelines set forth by the reactors designers and an egregious
violation of safety protocol. The death toll from radiation from the meltdown is estimated at 64 people, still significantly less than other forms of energy. Support for nuclear energy has dropped from 60% in favor of the expansion of nuclear power to 40% after the partial meltdown of the Fukhishima plant. The media has been over dramatizing the events causing Americans to reevaluate the potential costs and benefits of nuclear power. Their fear, however, is impacting their judgement. The world needs to begin thinking about its long term energy future and the potential costs of inaction concerning climate change. Nuclear power does have some drawbacks and is not the silver bullet of clean energy but it should become a significant part of a sustainable energy future. If countries fail to realize the immense potential that nuclear has to power the world, the costs of continuing to use unsustainable energy sources may be significantly greater than anything we can immediately quantify.
Fork in the Road

By Joseph Cordi The destruction caused by the earthquake and subsequent tsunami in Japan is well known. However, whether or not Japans economy will show resiliency is not. You do not have to look back far to see when Japan was last ravished by a natural disaster. In fact, it was in 1995 when the Kobe earthquake destroyed the country. Fortunately, the economy was able to
April - May 2011
recover rather quickly: will it happen economic outlook for Japan look the jishuku (which translates to selfagain? bleak at best. restraint). Unlike the trend that is currently happening in America, the Japans economy was sputtering for We, halfway across the world in the Japanese people are known for saving years before these recent natural United States, are already feeling the and only buying necessities. While disasters hit. Now, they are faced affects of the natural disasters in Japan saving and spreading oneself too thin with even more crucial problems. in our every day lives. Companies financially are savvy qualities, the The nuclear reactors are still not who produce their goods in Japan lack of consumption can also impede under control. A report surfaced are experiencing a halt in supply. economic growth. last week that waters nearby one of Japan is one of the largest exporters the reactors contained abnormally in the entire world, specifically in Economic Minister Kaoru Yosano high levels of radioactivity, which is the automotive and petrochemical recently spoke about the need for the now putting mass amounts of sea- industries. Their revenue stream has Japanese to stop jishuku and to buy life at risk. Hundreds of people still been driven by exports for decades goods to help stimulate the economy. need necessities such as electricity and now these exports will be lacking. This plan seems simple and should after losing everything in the wreck. This may allow other countries help stimulate the recovery effort, Prime Minister Naoto Kan has not come in and replace them, which yet it will not be easily implemented. implemented an agenda to restore the would further cripple the economy. Jishukui is not a trend in Japan; it is a country and has even relinquished Japanese consumption of goods way of life. Will the Japanese people power to Yoshihito Sengoku. All of is crucial to stimulate economic admonish to their economic minister? these problems coupled with the growth, especially with exports being already slugglish economy make the limited. Consumption goes against
Investing: Coinstar Inc.

By Jarren Smith On April 2nd, a team from the Finance and Investment Club and myself went to Georgetown to compete in their 2nd annual stock pitch conference. The competition was stiff and the judges were relentless in the Q&A session, but ultimately we won. We took a little bit of a risk pitching a short position in Coinstar, Inc. (CSTR), an automated retail solutions company that draws 80% of its revenue from Redbox DVD kiosks, however, we were confident and passionate about our investment thesis and that is what set us apart from top schools like UVA, Georgetown, and The College of William & Mary.
Our thesis was simple: physicalcontent delivery is quickly becoming obsolete. The same factors that shook up the music industry, such as the ease of file sharing, faster download times, and the iPod, are all going to threaten the movie industry as well. As movies shift from physical content toward online streaming and downloading, Redbox (with no strategy to move online) will be left in the dust. Even if they do decide like Netflix - to change their strategy, they will still be too late to the party. With no subscriber base, and cashrich competitors like Apple, Amazon, Netflix, and all the major TV networks, saying it will be difficult is an understatement. Moreover, not only is Redbox up against these professional and premium providers, but they also face headwinds due to copyright infringement from torrents and websites like channel 131 not
to mention free providers such as Hulu. Similarly, Coinstars coin counting machines - which account for 20% of their revenue - are in a dying industry. As our society moves from physical currency toward electronic forms of payment, consumers will have no need for these machines. Further pressure facing this side of Coinstars business is the potential elimination of the penny, long-term inflationary trends that make loosechange practically meaningless, and the rise of competitors (banks) that are providing this service for free. Using the discounted cash flow method, our team projected revenues for 2011 at 30%. We arrived at this number based on management guidelines of 20% to 30% - and since we were recommending a short position, we used the higher revenue
5
projection to create a margin of safety. For the following years we projected 15%, then 7.5%, then 3% growth into perpetuity. After modeling it out, we calculated a fair value per share at $38 which is $8 lower than what its currently trading at.
Some risks to our short position included the possibility of a short squeeze since about 41% of the float is short. Another risk is that Coinstar is able to transfer their knowledge from operating DVD and coin kiosks toward operating health and mines where inland transportation costs are higher. Miners that transfer coal by rail, truck, or river barge use fuel as a key input in their production cost models. Oil prices can also affect the freight market. If a miner plays a role in the transportation of goods, say in the case of a Colombian mine selling to Chinese buyers, he might face premiums from shipping companies, even if theyre selling at FOB basis- this increases the per ton threshold to break even. Miners know two things: First, just about 40% of the worlds electricity is generated using coal. Second, infrastructure development projects are abundant and widespread. This cooperative demand is on course to outpace production. Though cash cows like BHP Billiton, VALE, and Rio Tinto are just coming of record profits in 2010, they are still exposed to risk from oil volatility. So where is oil going? Analysts are looking everywhere: potential supply disruptions from further crises in the Mid-east, whether or not Japan
beauty product kiosks. And finally, the greatest risk is if Redbox is able to leverage their strong brand into an online presence but we believe this will be very difficult given the strong competitors in the arena as well as pressure from free content.
Mining Investments Around the Corner

By Joseph Cordi Miners are cashed up and ready to splurge. To meet the demand forecasts of major consumers like China and India, the worlds biggest mining companies are using their capital to increase their supply potential and theyre moving quickly. Just last Friday, Australias mining giant, BHP Billiton, announced $12.8 billion in an expansion campaign devoted to increased coal and iron ore operations. In the next financial year, they plan to spend an additional $20.8 billion in capital investment. But exactly how much more will their growth projects cost them with oil prices going up? Well, it could be a lot. Miners look at oil prices as a key metric in determining their production costs. For example, changes in oil price affect open cast
can get their refineries in order, or even how US regulators will address drilling permits here at home. If we look at our bulls, they seem to be betting on energy commodities to fuel the appetites of the BRICs. Some might even be callous enough to argue theyre hedging against scanty currencies. Buffets purchase of Lubrizol Corp. should be enough for all of us to know that, long term, oil is going nowhere but up. While little is certain, we can be sure that speculation is rampant, inconsistent, and rather unchecked. In the short term, banks like JPMorgan put Brent at $118, even flirting with $130, in the next quarter. The reality is, if we see a long term increase in oil prices from political turmoil, Black Swans, or just bad policy- we can expect greater costs for miners. If you link that with divested interest from actual production of goods to capital investment, we may see less stellar earnings on the horizon.
S c i e n c e & Ph i l os o ph y
A Specter is Haunting Humanity: The Political Psychology of Change
6
By Peter A. Horan
American people are therefore, primarily progressive. Conservatism, A friend once confidently asserted in this light, assumes a tone of to me that the progressive platform inevitable demise in front of the always passes in America. No change of progressivism. Yet my doubt he meant to imply that the friend, unfortunately, misses the true
April - May 2011
impetus of inevitability. It is not the neo-Hegelian spirit of progress that moves America. Rather, change itself inevitably moves America. In fact, change moves all people, not out of any sort of logical superiority to a lack thereof, but rather due to the condition of our human psychology. This is not a cause for smug satisfaction, as my friend seems to think, but a cause for genuine terror for we who wish to formulate rational political decisions. Let us first consider the most obvious victory of change itself: Barak Obamas victory in 2008. As all pundits agree, Obama was the candidate of change. The American people were obviously and understandably unhappy with President Bush, a politician of excessive spending and embarrassing speeches. Senator McCain was painted as if the successor and continuation of Bush policies. The American people naturally found this repugnant, and turned to the other candidate, Mr. Obama. Now this latter senator fully embraced the repugnance felt by Americans, and elected himself the candidate for change. Yet what does this mean? We established the dissatisfaction with the then current Bush circumstances. So the American people wanted something different. Yet different implies something not synonymous with change. The former implies a variation, a departure from the present condition in either form or degree. Change, however, implies a fundamental transformation. Change deals in forms, not degrees. Thus logically, before we condone a change, we must 1) be acquainted with present circumstances and 2) understand the destination of form that change directs us to. Transformation does not necessarily transfigure.
The modern world has demonstrated a peculiar tendency to pervert means into ends in themselves. In the past we would have defined this as vice. For example, those who work to earn money as a means to food, leisure, etc. are perfectly fine people. Yet when they crave money for the sake of money, when they turn a means into an end, they pervert the natural order. We accuse them of greed. Modern political ideology has developed this same perverse tendency with its rhetoric. In the late 19th century, Friedrich Nietzsche set the precedent for this practice by taking will and power, normally transitive actions contingent upon what they do, and made them ends in themselves. Now Nietzsche meant taking these words as metaphysical driving forces, synonymous with life-force or will to live. However, they may be interpreted rather literally, as Hitler illustrated for future generations. His platform made great use of will to power, which sounded lovely to Germans psychologically crushed by the loss of World War I. He promised to make Germany great and powerful once again. Yet how was he to accomplish this? What would he do with his power? We know he used it brutally and tyrannically. So power, a transitive utility, depends explicitly on what it is powering. We may only then judge its merit. Hitler in fact played a little psychological guessing game with the German masses. He would throw out a transitive, and they would guess the end. He would say Germany will be powerful, and they would privately superimpose what they considered a proper
end for power. One person might be particularly concerned with economic power, and assume Hitler was discussing that. Just so, someone thinking about military might, or one obsessed with infrastructure could both infer Hitler would see to their concerns with his triumph of the will. The brilliance of this rhetorical tactic is that Hitler appeals to all three ends without excluding or dividing them. In fact he says nothing, but he implies everything. His implication is in the means, and the imagination, not the reason, of the people fills in the rest. He takes a transitive, and makes it an intransitive. Now consider the rhetoric of President Obama. He brilliantly employed easy catch phrases like change we can believe in and yes we can, even words as simple yet complex as hope. These all sound like wonderful advents, but only (rationally speaking) if I superimpose my belief that we wish to do good things, that we agree on the good things we wish to do, and that my we is the same as Mr. Obamas. Yet I have inferred all of these contingents. I have been told none of them in the Obama slogans. I am not even certain that change means improvement. I remember standing in the square in front of the White House with hundreds of giddy students chanting Yes we can! the night of the 2008 election. Having grown up in America, a land favoring minimal government, I must say I have never seen very many people actually excited about politics. Yet when I heard them chanting I saw a mass of people jubilant over politics become a political mob. I felt the crackle of energy run through the crowd. I heard the chant yes we can, but I never heard what we can do.
7
I realized, with not some degree of horror, that perhaps this candidate had been elected on emotion rather than reason. My friend was wearing a McCain t-shirt, which I felt was a little boorish, but the people in the crowd looked at him as genuinely evil. I feared for my safety, as well as his. Suddenly I understood all the historical talk about the masses, and politicians controlling the mob. I stood face to face with the everlasting mob, and I am confident that if Obama himself were there, they would have done anything he asked, for good or ill. Yet all of this is a rational consideration. The equation of change logically requires an end as well as a beginning. However, change itself can be an end, an unfortunate fact of human nature. Obama was not merely playing a rhetorical guessing game with the masses. He was running on the crushing inevitability of change itself. My freshman year psychology teacher drilled into us the maxim: The brain craves novelty! The brain craves novelty! This means that the
brain likes change. We as humans like change in itself. So let us play with implications. Suppose we had a perfect system of government. Perfection, as we conceive of it, is an absolute end. Perfection is the absence of change. So hypothetically, as human beings, perfection is insufficient. Perfection is simply not perfect enough. Or perhaps we are not perfect enough for perfection. Now of course, in the high abstract world of metaphysical perfection, one must also take into account infinites, which would satisfy our need for change with expansiveness. Yet for the sake of argument, let us consider the possibility that, as flawed creatures, our nature desires something other than that which is good, perfection, but rather that which stimulates us, change. The stimulation of course may be good, and it may be bad. The fact that stimulation, however, would and does take precedent over reason in American politics is terrifyingly arbitrary.
Then you come across a door in a field. You have two friends with you. One says that if you open the door, all evil will come out and destroy your world. Do not open the door! Your other friend argues that through that door lies the ultimate perfection, and that you are a fool not to open it. Open the door! Which advice would you listen to? Would you look before you leap, or would let fortune favor the bold? The scenario strikes the same melancholy note as the mythological expulsion of Adam and Eve from Eden over the Tree of Knowledge, and similarly Pandoras Box. Obviously human nature has not changed in three thousand years.
Plato believed governments degenerate because of peoples stupidity. G.K. Chesterton posited that governments instead degenerate because people are tiered. I argue that governments degenerate because people are inevitably the slaves of change, which perhaps results from both stupidity and being tiered with the same old, even if the same old is wonderful. Do not be so quick to chant change, unless change is Consider for yourself, for example, good. the power of change. You live in a world that is good, but not perfect. probable: that a man rose from the dead, or that the witness was wrong. Not only is this a fatal blow towards believing any miracles, but also an important argument in the case of testimony. For Hume, all humans should be skeptical first until they have enough trust in the witness to warrant a belief in his claims. This very argument is also a covert attack on all religious belief, and shows that modern day believers are in fact quite skeptical in their own right. scholarship, accounts composed by people who were not even present at most of the events, and that were written years after the events. The religious fervently believe that the whole book, through their own dogmas, is the Word of God, and that it was composed with the guidance of God through his other form known as the Holy Spirit. The good book is filled with gruesome stories of God commanding his faithful to draw up arms and slaughter every tribe in their way. Right after Moses receives the Ten Commandments the All religions are built off of the faith Israelites are ordered by Yahweh to of testimony. That is how the Bible is kill their own brothers, murdering written: it contains, through biblical thousands of their own kind. All this
April - May 2011
Religion and Truth

By Chrisian Geoghehan David Hume, the man who brilliantly interrupted Kant from his dogmatic slumber, is also responsible for extinguishing the flickering flame of miracles. Hume argued that a supposed miracle must be compared to its other possibility, and whichever is less miraculous is the one that people should believe. For example, as Hume discusses, if one hears testimony that a person saw a dead man become alive again, one should immediately decide which is more
8
seems quite believable: God orders others to kill for him. Why then, in our modern day and age, does every single person dismiss anyone who claims that God told them to kill another human being as insane? In fact, based on their own belief system, all religious people must believe this because it coincides perfectly with the actions of their own God. My point here concerns the need for a consistent epistemological framework. If religious people claim to know a certain fact or justify a certain belief through a particular way of acquiring a certain knowledge (i.e. religious testimony), then presumably this epistemological framework should hold true throughout time. Thus the epistemological justification for knowing certain things should remain consistent since none of the variables we are talking about changed drastically over time (the variables being a divine being and human beings). If God decided to reveal his goodness to human beings thousands of years ago, why wouldnt
this trend continue to present day? Any person that claims to be God, or said God talks to them, must be believed as true because this was proof enough at the foundation of most religions. Where would Christianity be without people prophesying and claiming to be talked to by God? Why did the claims of illiterate, barbaric people of a certain region of the Middle East seem reasonable to the flock thousands of years ago, but not now? I claim that this would be considered insanity within a modern discourse because subconsciously people believe that the science, logic, and reason are much better tools to obtain knowledge particularly when juxtaposed with the ravings of some lunatic. Every religious person must make, as Kierkegaard said, a leap of faith. However, this leap is not something that is done only once, but in fact requires continuous undertakings to be maintained. The Church doubling back on scientific theories
such as the Earth revolving around the sun, or recently, and in an act that contradicts the dogma that all popes are infallible, the recanting of the existence of Limbo are all proof of this. The mental gymnastics, and, as Sartre described, bad faith or self-delusion, that must occur to believe the capriciousness of human tinkering and error is staggering. All this is acceptable while the unbeliever is accused of being arrogant in his belief. But is not the monotheist somewhat an atheist in his own right? He does not believe in Thor, or Zeus, or Ra, or any of the other thousands of gods that have been created by humans. He only believes in one god, which is getting closer to the true number. The flock will always jump like a skier, from mogul to mogul, to try to justify what they believe, all the while dismissing the very testimony they propose to be the foundation of their own belief.
Same Sex Marriage and Civil Rights

By Madison Noble Marriage is a longstanding social institution that promotes personal and social growth, and is the normative ideal for how companionship, love, personal economics and child rearing are organized. In the past, and currently in thirty-six states, marriage has been restricted to a man and a woman, a social norm that finds its origins in monotheistic religions such as Christianity. Up until now, legislation such as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), enacted by
Congress in 1996 during the Clinton administration, has barred same-sex couples from getting married and enjoying the legal rights that are granted to a married couple. Some of these legal rights include, but are not limited to, joint adoption, inheritance of property, joint tax filing, and making spousal medical decisions. According to the English philosopher John Locke, whose works, Two Treatises on Government and An Essay on Human Understanding greatly influenced the Founding Fathers of our country, The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but
to preserve and enlarge freedom. Congress must govern by laws that apply equally to everyone; as such, these laws must be written for the good of all people. Legislation such as DOMA does not uphold the best interests of the nation. Instead, it discriminates against and marginalizes a large group of citizens who deserve equal rights and protection under the law. It is wrong to think that such a discriminatory and closeminded law will be upheld for much longer when the country is moving towards a majority of same-sex marriage acceptance; approximately 41% of people in 2010 favor samesex marriage (Pew Research Center
9
for the People and the Press). Locke noted that while Congress has high legislative powers, the people are supreme, for they possess the power to demand certain legislation or remove and/or alter legislation that is not seen as fit. While it is clear that the legal rights that come along with marriage are highly beneficial on a more day-to-day basis, the emotional ramifications of not being allowed to marry because of ones sexuality are noteworthy. Locke famously declared, all mankind being equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions, meaning that as human beings, we have the right to live our lives as we choose, as long as our acts do not infringe upon the rights of others. All mankind is equal; the restriction of same-sex marriage is in direct conflict with the freedom and equality of all members of society. Without equal rights under the law, same-sex couples are unjustly viewed and treated as second-class citizens whose lives are somehow less valuable or important than different-sex couples. If samesex marriage were to be legalized on a federal level same-sex couples will be valued and treated as essential citizens and will thus have protected liberties and possessions.
Many of the objections to same-sex marriage have been justified through appeals to tradition or appeals to religious practices. The former implies that we have some kind of obligation to uphold all norms and traditions that our society has had in the past. This is simply untrue: just as we let go of other intolerant societal norms, restrictions on the same-sex marriage should also be lifted. The latter appeal to religious practice, however, is often a mask for a general disgust at the concept of a same-sex marriage. Philosopher Martha Nussbaum has helpfully pointed out that judgments that have their genesis in a kind of disgust are typically constructed through societal socialization and can therefore be arbitrary and destructive. For example, during the period when the Jim Crow laws were instituted in the South, black people were not allowed to even drink from the same drinking fountain was white people. There was a sense of disgust at the thought of a black man drinking from a white fountain, somehow upsetting the white fountains purity. For Nussbaum, there are not too many steps from the judgment that had its genesis from disgust in the Jim Crow context to the judgment that ultimately leads people to feel as though same-sex marriages should be banned.
Surely a just society founded upon the idea that as human beings we have certain self-evident natural rights (life, liberty and property within the Lockean conception) would extend a certain amount of legal rights to all citizens regardless of something as arbitrary as sexual preference. The government of the United States has an obligation, as stated in the Constitution, to promote the general welfare of the people; therefore, the legalization of same-sex marriage, without a doubt, falls under the category of general welfare. While same-sex is not a societal norm as of yet, this can and must change since a society without progress is stagnant and stale; new ideas and reforms move society into the future. As Locke once said, new opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common, so while same-sex marriage is a relatively new notion, it should not be illegal. We, as a nation, should respect the traditions of our ideals that find their roots in Locke, equality for all under the law and the right to liberty and a full life.
Justice or Resentment
By Raj Patel Perhaps the most famous contemporary theory of justice, the Rawlsian theory of justice outlined in his seminal work Justice as Fairness, has a component within it called the maximin principle. The maximin principle is a rule which states that
10
economic and other inequalities should be arranged in such a way that the least advantaged members of society are better off because of these very inequalities. As Amartya Sen points out, such inequalities may not be desirable in a perfect world but in the real world incentives are needed for production and incentive structures lead to inequalities between people.
The maximin principle seems perfectly reasonable in a fair and just society. That is, presumably we would all prefer to live in a society where standards of living are improving for all citizens and not just those in the upper classes. A society where one group was parasitic upon the majority strikes us as intuitively offensive in any form (although we all must put up with it to a certain extent,
April - May 2011
indeed, we accept the existence of the government bureaucrat as a necessary evil).
arising from different salaries given to different people would be the result of the different quantities and kinds of value created by those different The problem arises when people people. Why should justice then be focus on the relative inequality conceptualized in terms of closing between human classes as opposed the inequalities that arise from the to the absolute positions of all different values created by people of people within a given society. Most differing ability? economists would agree that as a society becomes industrialized, If we cant conceptualize justice within developed and continues with these terms that is, within the need steady economic growth, economic to close inequalities that are a result inequalities between social classes of differing relative abilities what may become more pronounced but should these feelings be regarded as? the absolute position of all social I contend that, generally speaking, classes begin to move upward as people who are intent on making well. This claim may seem similar justice into a matter of equalizing to the conservative trickle-down people in the sense I have been economic policy initiatives but there talking about are actually masking is an important difference: I am ugly feelings of resentment that are a being descriptive and illuminating result of their relative positions within an empirical finding that economists a given structure. An interesting have observed, not normative and parallel between the Nietzschean arguing that our society should adopt conception on the origins of evil can any such policies. be drawn here. All kinds of contemporary social activists scream for justice in the name of closing the inequality between different social classes. What they are missing is that the inequality here is not offensive in itself: that is, if we lived in a world where salaries were an apt measure of value created within an economic system (which is exactly what they are intended to represent, that is, the price of labor), then presumably inequalities
have power over us to the strong are evil. (Nietzsche terms these power relations in his characteristically classical style using a story about birds of prey and lambs in the first book of Genealogy). In other words, a subjective feeling of hatred and resentment was transformed and characterized within a metaphysical concept of evil. To complete the analogy, the subjective feelings of hatred and resentment described in our previous considerations on economic inequalities are instead transformed and termed within the powerful concept of justice.
To wit, because we live in an era where all inequalities are considered to be bad, we have all the more reason to carefully consider our judgments when it comes to these matters. Not to jump on the bandwagon to equalize was, for Nietzsche, representative of a love of humanity and those who wished to equalize and get rid of the rare and exceptional For Nietzsche, the value judgments of were considered by him to detest good and bad were first subjective humanity. For him, it was the rare judgments of the masters or rulers; and exceptional human beings who the qualities that were good were the were true representatives of humanity qualities possessed by the masters as opposed to the homogenous mass. themselves and the qualities that were In the same way, perhaps it would be bad were the qualities not possessed wise not to try and iron out all the by the masters. When the weak unique and rare individuals by taking realized their power in relation to the up arms against any and all variations strong, by strong I mean the masters, we come across. they objectified their hatred from the subjective judgment that the strong
Pol i t i c s
Buying Your Ballot
By Eytan Stern Were all aware of GWs above average political activism. While
some students enthusiastically entwine politics and their everyday lives, others see politics as a separate field from which they can disengage at will. For some, its almost as if politics are an extra-curricular activity
like jogging or the SA, in that they are kind of a good thing, but really annoying to deal with and you would much rather let that be someone elses thing. However, as much as I wish this werent the case, it is impossible
11
to separate ourselves from politics in Regardless of whether or not you this country, simply because we will subscribe to this idea, dont you think never stop buying things. it would have been appropriate to have some sort of notification that the The proof is simple. We have money, camera you just bought has a GOP we give money to companies for goods receipt? At the very least, I think and services, various politicians/ thank-you cards are in order. Maybe political causes need money, and it would have been better to shop at larger companies give it to the ones Best Buy, since they only contributed they/their shareholders see fit. In $100,000 to Targets $150,000. simplified terms, the money coming from our wallets for simple things Why dont we take a look at our own J like food, clothing, and education Street? Lets say you decide to take the are fueling a virtually endless array of healthy option, avoiding the meat ideologies and actions. of Burrito Del Rey and Wendys by getting a chicken sandwich from Ever gone to Target for some dorm Chick-fil-A. Of the companies in furniture or clothing? Most likely this category, I respect Chick-fil-A unbeknownst to you, a portion of slightly more in that most companies your money was used to support try to conceal their personal motives Tom Emmers 2011 gubernatorial entirely, while Chick-fil-A only campaign. Emmer is a republican does so in every way visible to the who has made abundantly clear his customer. By this, I mean they support of and staunch adherence proudly flaunt To glorify God to the norm of traditional marriage. as their corporate mission statement.
Though while this business actively promotes a conservative Christian agenda, the typical consumer is completely unaware of this, whilst handing over the money for it to do so. The list of corporations that use consumer money for political gains is endless, e.g. Walmart, Ben & Jerrys, and McDonalds, to name a few big ones. In the end, my point is not that we should focus all our attention on the tickers, only that the reins of politics are already in our hands. Trying to ignore the control we yield through our daily expenditure is like denying that youre driving a car; closing your eyes and letting go of the steering wheel doesnt make it all better. The only thing we can do is open our eyes, take a hard look at what we do on a day-to-day basis, and promise to look where were going from now on.
Free Speech
By Christian Geoghegan There is no greater liberty on this planet than that of free speech. It is the basis of all other rights and, lest we lose all of them, should be upheld and protected in every circumstance, without exception. We either have complete freedom, or we have none. There is no in between as freedom is an absolute in itself, and anything less than absolute freedom is the lack there of. Therefore, so as not to implicate any of our other rights, to adhere to the majesty of free thought, and to reject the idea that another human can be the master of our minds by proposing that they have the right to censor thought, freedom of speech must be able to absolute.
12
First off, let us consider the common argument made against absolute freedom of speech: the proposition that one cannot yell Fire! in a crowded theater when there is no fire. Putting aside the fatuousness of that statement made by Chief Justice Oliver William Holmes, it can easily posited that it is in fact much more dangerous and prone to chaos to yell fire in a theater when there actually is a fire (minus the common sense reaction of most people in the audience, when upon hearing fire, will obviously know whether or not there actually is one). However, the main point is that the context to which this statement was given was actually during the First World War. At this time, there was a group of socialist Jews who distributed a pamphlet in Yiddish encouraging
other to boycott the war because of the dangers being covered up by the Wilson administration. They were condemned to prison for life. Therefore, Chief Justice Holmes equated the warnings of the horrors of war, to the dangers of warning a crowd of a false fire. I beg your pardon Mr. Holmes, but there was definitely a fire. Most well minded modern citizens would then say that freedom of speech is important, but should have some limitations. What most people are referring to would be so called offense committed against religion, as if religion is free from criticism. That is nothing short of nonsense and absurdity. Take, for instance, the case in 1989 when author Salman Rushdie published a fantastic novel, The
April - May 2011
Satanic Verses. This book contained numerous offenses to Muslims around the world, that the Ayatollah Khomeini issued, with reward money from his own pocket, and through his own name, a fatwa on Mr. Rushdie, which stated that it was the duty of every Muslim to dispatch him from this mortal coil. Foreign translators and publishers were attacked, shot, tortured and killed, while many other religious authorities, such as the Pope, issued statements of support for the Ayatollah. Many said that Mr. Rushdie took the danger upon himself when he wrote the book and deserves what he gets because he should have known better than to offend the mighty religion of Islam. The shear callousness and idiocy that a free, democratic society that prides itself on its protection of civil liberties would remain silent in one of the most terrifying examples of religious fascism in modern memory
is appalling. This same situation was repeated in 2006 when a Danish cartoon featuring the profit Muhammad with a bomb on his head caused pandemonium in the Islamic communities around the world. Racist attacks and pogroms made on anyone who looked Scandinavian as well as Danes in general, violations of diplomatic immunity and sanctity when embassies were attacked, and the call for the Danish prime minister to violate his own constitution by banning the publication of the cartoon. Do we bow down to these threats and executions of violence? Do we eradicate our liberties because others are offended, or others may disagree with us? The truth is that not only do we have an intellectual obligation to uphold the fatuous
nature of our opponents arguments so we can point out their foolishness without resorting to childish, fascistic censorship, but also that everyone is offended by something and we do not have a right to not be offended. A Muslim may take umbrage with the examples I have made in this article, which is perfectly fine. And I am offended when apologists make excuses for those priests who raped and tortured those innocent young boys. But where is the line drawn? Who decides what is acceptable and what is not? It is intellectually and morally stupid to even posit such a person who could fill the role as a societal censor. Freedom of speech should, and must be upheld completely because if we lose our voice, if we lose the right to speak out, if we lose the right to even have an opinion, we have lost our liberty.
The Russian Republic
Russian population, that President George W. Bush was a warmonger, By Victor Bogachev that Republicans were evil, and that Russian President Vladimir Putin was I am a Russian citizen and I am a a democrat. In my nine years living Republican. Take a moment to soak in the United States, these views have that in. There have been very few changed entirely. instances when I did not see a flare of surprise in a new acquaintances eyes At age eleven, when I first stepped upon revealing this information to foot on the campus of a prestigious them. I would agree that the concept boarding school in Massachusetts, of a passionate Republican from I was very fond of newly elected a state that only 30 years ago was Russian President Putin and the dubbed The Empire of Evil by one centralized state of government that of the most influential Republican he was running in Russia. Strong Presidents of the 20th century is central government appeared to me almost incomprehensive. as a source of stability and security necessary to rule a state. Unfortunately, My path to the ranks of the Grand my views did not change voluntarily. Old Party was gradual, but linear. I In 2003, my family experienced firstcame to the United States in 2002 hand the perils of concentrated power with a belief, popular amongst the when my father, an independent
businessman, was forced to sell his company, viewed as a threat to a state-owned monopoly Gazprom. Perplexed at the ease with which the state maneuvered the hostile takeover and the lack of checks and balances to protect the individual rights and liberties, I found myself needing to reevaluate my political standing. At thirteen years of age, I slaved over reading and understanding the literary works that shaped todays world, in hope that they would help me find my own political ground. Wealth of Nations, On Liberty, Das Capital, Second Treatise of Government, Leviathan, Prince, and countless other works suggested to me by the faculty whose advice I sought out began to shape the political views that I hold today.
13
I will admit, my venture into understanding political ideologies was biased. After the horrors that my family had gone through, I lost trust in the strong central government and required a more compelling argument than that of Hobbes or Machiavelli to convince me otherwise. To this day I have not found one. In my conversations with a handful of liberal-minded friends, whose opinion I greatly respect, I have always been told, people are incapable of making the right decisions for themselves. The influence of the press, politicians, and religion cloud the minds of the population. Unfortunately, they fail to realize that the only reason this country is the pinnacle of freedom and democracy in the world is precisely that it is the choice of individuals to make it so. To quote the late President Dwight Eisenhower The history of free men is never really written by chance but choice; their choice! Ground set, the rest of my ideology began to fall into place like dominoes. The economy, one of the most
important factors of political alliance for any citizen, cannot survive with government intervention. The supply and demand of the market is precisely the freedom of choice that I began to believe was the most treasured aspect of democracy. Any time a government chooses to arm-wrestle the invisible hand of the economy with the iron fist of federal intervention, only tragedy prevails. It is imperative to realize that the strong economy of the United States based on the choices of the consumer is the very reason this young country has achieved greatness. The American Dream is impossible without the free market. Success is unachievable if the government takes the very incentive to work away from the people, resulting in a state of apathy and reliance on the federal government to provide.
Romney, The invisible hand of the market always moves faster and better than the heavy hand of government. Although in a perfect world no central government would be necessary, we do not live in a perfect world. Federal government is necessary, but only to protect the democracy and the civil rights and liberties of its citizens. Americas success and protection of its citizens economic interests are the cause of the resentment of the United States by many centralized states around the world.
The foundation of freedom and democracy that exists in the United States is a threat to any state that undermines the rights of its citizens and a sufficient reason, in the mind of the tyrants, to destroy or weaken the United States of America. It is for this very reason that, in my mind, one of the foremost responsibilities of the Innovation, hard work, prosperity, and federal government is to protect its success, the trademarks of America, citizens from the misguided efforts of are the direct result of free market the rogue states. and liberal economics. To quote the 2008 presidential candidate, Mitt
Mandate of Heaven: The Imperial Quing Restoration Organization

By The Informers Paul Stephen The struggle for democracy in China is well documented, and there are myriad worldwide organizations devoted to this end. Even more famous are the conflicts between the Chinese government and internal actors (such are the Falun Gong religious movement and Uyghur agitators), as well as a decades-long
14
conflict with the Dali Lama of Tibet. These struggles evoke bitter controversy and political debate the world over, and have proven a hotbutton international issue calling into question Chinas public image and popular perception. While these international controversies have raged on, a small but dedicated organization has quietly worked to bring an end to the Communist Partys rule over China, and install a new governmenta monarchist government. The Imperial Qing Restoration Organization, as its name suggests, seeks to restore the Qing Dynasty to powerbringing
China once again under the rule of an emperor, and reestablishing its longdormant dynastic system. The Qing Restoration Organization is headed by its founder, the selftitled His Imperial Highness Lee Chee Chuan who claims to be the legitimate heir to the throne of the Tang Dynasty (618-907 AD). HIH Lee indeed seeks to restore the Qing to power, but only as a means to an end. According to the Imperial Qing Restoration websiteand several conversations between The Informer and the organizations Minister of Communicationsthe plan would
April - May 2011
be to re-instate the fallen Qing Dynasty, which would then step aside and allow the Tang Dynasty to come to power, making HIH Lee the next emperor of China. Lees justification for this is simple: the Qing Dynasty was composed of Manchurians, not Han Chinese, and was seen by the Chinese people as foreign. According to Lee, the Chinese people would not support the return of the Qing to power, but they would support the rule of a Han Chinese dynasty such as the Tang. For more information about Chinas historic system of dynastic transition, as well as the Qing Restoration Organizations plans for restoration, we turned to Edward McCord, an associate professor of history and international affairs here at GW and a noted specialist in the field of Chinese history. According to McCord: The Qing Restoration Organization seems more enamored of the idea of monarchy than any real loyalty to the fallen Qing dynasty. Indeed, they only call for the restoration of the Qing as something of a legalistic means of reestablishing the monarchy itselfto be followed by yet another abdication in favor of the ascension of a new ethnically Han emperor to the imperial throne. Unfortunately, traditional Chinese concepts of imperial rule, based on the idea of the Mandate of Heaven, do not actually require a formal transition of this nature. The fall of a dynasty was always seen as showing that the dynasty had in fact lost the Mandate to rule. Continuity of blood lines from previous fallen dynasties carry no residual political authority as often claimed by other royal families. Rather, the Mandate is simply passed to the next leader to emerge who could reunify the empire under their rule. If one still believed in the concept of
the Mandate of Heaven, one would have to accept that it passed first to the leaders of the Nationalist Party in the Republican era, and then to the leaders of the Communist Party in 1949.
On the organizations website, HIH Lee sees reclaiming the imperial throne as vital to Chinas future and to the survival of its people. According to Lee, if he were restored to power, he would work to improve Chinas relations with neighboring countries such as Japan and Thailand, remove censorship of the internet, and better manage Chinas economy. HIH Lee claims to still be in possession of the Imperial seal, sword, robe, and edict. Lee believes that his possession of these items proves that he is the legitimate heir to the Tang throne, and maintains that he will The current heir to the Qing Dynasty return to mainland China when the is Prince Hengzhen, who is related opportunity presents itself. to Chinas last emperor, Puyi, and would have to be restored to power The organization points out several first, according to HIH Lee. The advantages monarchial rule. Restoration Organization claims to Monarchs, Lee declares, by their be in contact with Hengzhen, who very nature are more patriotic than currently lives in China. either Prime Ministers or Presidents. The Restoration Organization While the Imperial Qing Restoration maintains that monarchies are Organization is dedicated to its inherently far more efficient, goals, most if not all observers would impartial, and even representative dismiss these goals as impossible, than presidential or parliamentary and perhaps whimsical in nature. democracies. World history proves Yet the organizations goals are no that the civilization of any country more irrational than those who call is built by the monarchy, says Lee. for the establishment of democracy Thus, the organization is not only an in China. China has, after all, been advocate of Qing dynastic restoration, ruled by kings and emperors for but also a vanguard of monarchism nearly all of its thousands of years in generalarguing that a return to of historyending only in 1911. monarchy would serve to improve Lees suggested method of restoring both China and the world at large. The the Chinese monarchy is indeed Qing Restoration Organization may circuitous, but his organization be small and highly obscure, but it is makes the legitimate point that listed as member of the International monarchs can serve (even in modern Monarchist League, an organization society) as protectors of a nations
15
dedicated to the global restoration of monarchy. The organization has also established what it calls embassies in three foreign countries: Canada, Italy, and Greece, each with its own Qing Ambassador. The Restoration Organization itself is headquartered in Malaysiaout the Chinese governments reach. The Informer originally got in contact with the offices of HIH Lee, and spoke with Minister of Communications Vincent Tan. Minister Tan informed us that an interview with HIH Lee would not be possible for the time being, as the Qing Restoration Organization is under constant threat from the Chinese government which, according to Tan, has sent agents on numerous occasion trying to sabotage our organization.
culture and identityhallmarks of nationalism in a transnational age. As McCord states, even though there is little hope for a political restoration
of the Qing dynasty, there has in fact Chinese people. been something of a restoration of the reputation of the Qing dynasty among historians, if not among the
Palestine is Nowhere: Prospects of a Third Intifada

By Kareem Rosshandler Since the First Intifada was initiated in 1987, the Palestinian people have had a heightened consciousness for statehood but with nothing promising to answer for it. This Intifada uprising in Arabic was an effort to liberate Palestinian territories and fulfill aspirations of a Palestinian state. It was perhaps a direct response to Israels 1985 Iron Fist Policy, described by Israeli minister of Economics and Finance Gad Yaacobi as a creeping process of de facto annexation [of Palestinian territories]. The uprising was lauded by many observers from the international community for its legitimate cause and reasonable use of force. The Palestinians carried on a lightly armored, largely symbolic grassroots movement that was most effective in its use of civil disobedience and illustration of the disparity of power between those holding M-16 rifles and those holding stones and makeshift weapons.
loftiness of the 1993 Oslo Accords (signed by Arafat and Rabin, before Rabin was assassinated), and the international communitys more acute awareness of Israels occupation of Palestinian lands.
Soon, the grey that was Palestinian and Israeli diplomatic coexistence began to disappear as the black and white of interests and ideologies ebbed back into their corners until there was no longer common ground. Continued settlement expansion, the collapse of the unattainable Oslo Accords, and the relapse of both Israelis and Palestinians into quid pro quo violence culminated to the Second Intifada in 2000. This was when then far-right Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount, sparking clashes the following day between Palestinians and Israelis. For another five years or so, the West watched as news cameras broadcasted their preferred angles of the carnage and infamy wrought by the more desperate and militarized Palestinian groups, disenchanted with the original romanticism of the spirit of Intifada. Of course, Israel reciprocated in its signature asymmetry. The post-9/11 foreign policy agenda in the Middle East took precedence over all else in The legacy of the First Intifada the political arena, leaving the issue after 1993 was a significant change of Palestinian statehood once again in momentum for the Palestinian indefinitely deferred. cause, albeit short-lived, as it led to a renewed and unified Palestinian Where are we now? The political identity, the U.S. recognition of the context of the Second Intifada Palestine Liberation Organization as almost seems ideal for attaining the representative of the Palestinian statehood when compared to the people, the hope evoked by the abject political stalemate facing the
16
Palestinian nationalism movement what remains of its active agents today. For every progressive step made by Israel, two are taken back: Israel withdrew its settlers and military from illegally occupied Gaza in 2005, only for Israel to enforce an illegal blockade and subsequent siege in 2006 and 2008, respectively; Israels separation barrier was erected, suicide bombings stopped, but illegal settlement expansion and land annexation is now crassly rampant in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, crippling livelihoods and reinforcing the notion that, in reality, peace is not conducive to justice. Above all, the worst aspect of the current travesty that is Palestinian nationalism is the division of Palestinians after the 2006 rift between Fattah and Hamas in Gaza, in which Palestinian fought Palestinian. Moreover, according to the leaked Al Jazeera documents, Mahmoud Abbas was ready to sell off Palestinian claims to East Jerusalem the most apparent gesture of betrayal since the Palestinian Authority, along with Israel and the US, delayed the release of the United Nations Goldstone report on Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. Divide and conquer has proven to be an ill-fated formula for Palestinians. History has shown that Palestinians conducting popular armed uprisings are in a damned if you do, damned if you dont situation. Weekly protests along West Bank villages, recent Israeli laws aimed at Arab-Israelis, and
April - May 2011
over sixty percent unemployment in the Palestinian territories has showed Palestinians that peace is
quite empty without dignity. Since prospect of a third intifada has become the recent explosions in Jerusalem, evermore imminent in the land that is so far unclaimed by any party, the nowhere.
S po r t s
Final Four: NBA Style
By Zuhair Malik This NBA season has been one of streaks, and each powerhouse in the West and the East has had their hot and cold stretches. These are the streaks that set the contenders apart from the contenders, and come playoff time, momentum is a key ingredient in being able to advance through the rounds. As we approach the end of the season, playoff scenarios are being decided and matchups being predicted. Here are the top four teams that will be in this years playoffs, and barring different scenarios, should represent the East and West in their respective conference finals: West: The Los Angeles Lakers. The Laker teams of this past decade have been nothing short of a dynasty, ruling supreme with a total of seven finals appearances, and five of those resulting in victories(including the last two and a treble from 20002002). This year is the no different, as they come in to the playoffs with as two time defending champions, on their quest for yet another treble of championships for legendary coach Phil Jackson. The reason the Lakers come in as favorites are because of their play after the All-Star break. With an
overall record of 17-3 since the break, the Laker momentum has continued to grow as their big men and role players have recovered from injuries and are back and contributing. The biggest key has been the return of Andrew Bynum, whose healthy knee has been playing consistent minutes and putting up double digit rebounding since the break. When the Lakers have Bynum producing, they are a dangerous, tall, and incredibly difficult defense to play against. And when you have a guy named Kobe Bryant on your team, along with outstanding talents such as Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom, and a coach like Phil Jackson, they have to be deemed absolute favorites to complete yet another treble. This team is incredibly balanced, and most will struggle to cope with the size and strength put forth by Los Angeles. Oklahoma City Thunder. Perhaps the only team that can defeat or compete with Los Angeles in the playoffs is the Thunder. Lead by scoring machine Kevin Durant and live wire Russell Westbrook, this young and energetic team took the Lakers to six games just a year ago, a series that could have even gone all the way to seven games had the Thunder remembered to box out at the end of games. However, Oklahoma now has two separate factors which they did not have at their disposal the previous year: experience, and Kendrick Perkins. Experience for such a young time is
invaluable, as they will have learned from last years mistakes and will surely make corrections. However the more important physical change will be their size, and how Perkins adds to their playoff run. One of the major reasons that Boston lost to the Lakers in the finals last year was because of the loss of Perkins, where they lost incredible size, strength, and defense, all factors that are essential to beating a team like the Lakers. The addition of Perkins gives the Thunder what no other team in the West has, and this allows them to match up well with the size of Bynum and Gasol. If Westbrook and Durant can play at their usual strength, Perkins stays healthy alongside Serge Ibaka, and the Thunder takes care of business at home, the Laker reign might be in serious danger. Honorable mentions: San Antonio Spurs lack of size and too many old players will hold back their success. Dallas Mavericksno consistent scoring outside of Dirk, struggle against size and strength East: Chicago Bulls. The Bulls have slowly but surely become a powerhouse in the East, and will surely end as the number one seed, and, of course, home-court advantage. With the emergence of Derrick Roses MVP
17
caliber play and the return of Boozer from injury, the Bulls offense is well on track, and the suffocating defense of Tom Thibodeau has the Bulls leading defensive categories across the NBA. With a lethal pick and plenty of playoff experience, the Bulls are looking a dangerous force in the East, one that should scare the likes of Miami and Boston. They have size in Boozer and Noah, scoring and playmaking from Rose, along with the best team defense. Quite the ingredients for a solid championship run.
big three. This season is no different, as Rajon Rondo is the perfect point guard to be leading that team, a pass first creator who likes to distribute more than shoot. With a systematic and well-oiled machine kind of offense, and the kind of defensive savvy that the Celtics have, they are the second best team in the East and capable of competing with any team in the NBA.
the Conference finals without too much trouble. If they stick to their defensive mindset and efficiency on offense, there is no reason these Paul Pierce led Celtics wont have a chance to return to the finals. Honorable mentions: Miami Heatlack of interior defense and too much dependence on one on one matchups Orlando Magicheavy dependence on Dwight Howard, lack of inside help, and injury/foul prone New York period Knicksno defense,
One of the down sides of their run is the loss of Kendrick Perkins, in essence a very important player for Bostons success and their identity. Boston Celtics. With the Celtics, However, the problem of size isnt that it comes down to experience and great within the Eastern Conference, coaching. Boston has been there and and with deputized players such as done that, reaching multiple finals Shaq, Jeff Green, and Nenad Kristic, and being able to succeed with their the Celtics can scrape their way to
March Madness 2011

By Josh Grinsberg This March Madness has been one of the craziest and most unpredictable tournaments in recent history. From unexpected wins to crushing defeats, the 2011 tournament proved that anything can happen. For the first time ever since the bracket expanded to 64 teams in 1985, there were no number one or number two seeds in the Final Four. In fact, the combined seeds in the Final Four this year were the highest ever. Who could have predicted VCU going to the Final Four? However, I dont see March Madness ever becoming predictable and teams ever becoming overly dominant. There are a couple of reasons why March Madness has recently become so unpredictable. The first reason is the one-and-done rule. After the
18
2004 NBA Draft, The NBA Players Association accepted a minimumage rule in 2005 that requires noninternational players to be at least 19 years old and one year removed from high school before entering the NBA draft. Therefore, many high-school superstars enter college basketball with the notion that after a year, they will enter the NBA Draft. These high school athletes are not thinking about college success or a championship in college but about their NBA futures. This in turn is evening out the playing field. Since high school athletes are not staying in school for more than a year and are going to schools as an intermediary between high school and the NBA, there are no dominant teams anymore. Looking at recent college basketball champions, teams that have played with each other for more than a year are winning the NCAA tournament. It is hard to win a championship if a team has only
played one year together. On the other hand, teams with recent success in the tournament such as Butler and Michigan State have a constant nucleus with teammates that have played with each other for a good amount of time. Unless these star high school athletes start to focus on the collegiate level and not on their NBA future, I see the tournament remaining unpredictable.
Two Strikes and He Quits! Mannys Out

By Yogin Kothari The world of sports was shaken on Friday, April 8, 2011, as Manny Ramirez announced that he would officially retire from Major League Baseball. The reasons for his retirement however really put things into
April - May 2011
perspective. Ramirez decided to leave baseball because of his second runin with baseballs drug policy. Earlier that day, MLB disclosed that Ramirez had an issue with their Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. It was then that Ramirez decided not to continue with the program and instead chose to end his incredible and tainted career. Ramirez has left baseball as one of the games greatest right-handed hitters of all time. He also leaves the game as the only major leaguer to be caught using performance-enhancing drugs, twice. Instead of facing the consequences for his questionable and inexcusable actions during Spring Training earlier this year, Ramirez quit. His 555 home runs rank him 14th
on the all-time leader board. His two run-ins with baseballs drug policy rank him 1st on that leader board as well. Unfortunately for the eccentric Ramirez, his two run-ins with the baseball cops is what hell be remembered for most. Ramirez ended his career with 2,574 hits, a .585 career slugging percentage, a .996 OPS, and a .312 career batting average. He is a 12-time All-Star, a 9-time Silver Slugger Award winner, a 2-time World Series champion with the Boston Red Sox, and the World Series Most Valuable Player in 2004. Unfortunately, none of these remarkable statistics matter anymore. Any chance that he had to be voted into baseballs Hall of Fame is out the window. If he got caught twice in the last three years, what was he
doing before 2006? His entire career is now under a microscope. Was he ever clean? Are any of the numbers he put up legitimate? This second run-in isnt just a small blemish on his career; its a blotch, a smudge, and a stain that envelops his mercurial career with an extra-large asterisk. This was the perfect way for Ramirez to go out. It was a classic case of Manny quitting, just like he did on the Red Sox, and just like he did with the Dodgers. It was just Manny being Manny.
C u l t u r e & Ar t s
A Case for American Art
By Alicia Farina The question are we going to study any American art is often asked in classes or discussions exploring Western art. The answer is typically no, as these conversations are dominated by European artists, who are of great importance of course, but should not completely overshadow the work of American artists who addressed the unique social, political and economic situations of America in a necessary and personal way. While many make the claim that American artists just arent original enough to study until the mid-1900s or are consistently years behind European artists in terms of technique, the truth is that
American artists were not trying to mimic European artists exactly but rather emulate their expertise to create images that reflected the American experience. Take John Singer Sargents Madame X, for example. Although it harkens back to Edouard Manets famous Olympia, a French depiction of a propositioned prostitute, it is not a tasteless copy unworthy of study. Rather, it is a magnificently sexual representation of a modern goddess that was highly controversial at the time of its debut in the Paris Salon of 1884. Sargents Madame X depicts a modern woman who, aware that the viewer is staring at her porcelain skin and elongated limbs, chooses to turn her cheek. It is a compliment to Manets Olympia, not a cheap facsimile.
Thomas Coles Kaaterskill Falls of the Hudson River school was ahead of its time in representing the collision between recent industrialization and the beauty of the untamed American wilderness. Long before Monets Saint Lazare Station or Manets Boaters, Cole represents the hand of God in nature before the invention of the railroad and the encroaching of modern technology upon the undeveloped forests of upstate New York. With a mixture of natural, earthy, tertiary tones, Cole creates a brushy and painterly scene that captures the vitality of nature before the influx of mechanization and industry. Kaaterskill Falls epitomizes the dynamism of nature with its cascading waterfall and changing sky. It is original in its attempt to represent unadulterated nature just as industrialization begins in America
19
and illustrates the questionable future of the great American wilderness. James Abbott McNeil Whistlers Nocturne in Black and Gold was revolutionary in the aesthetic movement. By using the primary colors of the composition for the title of the work as opposed to the actual subject matter, Whistler
revolutionized art. The painting was no longer about the subject but rather what created the subject and the beauty of the creation. Nocturne in Black and Gold is art for the sake of art, a blending of colors to create something beautiful for the viewer.
Sidney Mount, Edmonia Lewis, and Marcel Duchamp, created work absolutely worth studying. They created pieces of art that may have been influenced by European trends and techniques but are uniquely American in that they represent both the human condition and the Each of these artists, as well as others American experience. such as Winslow Homer, William When I attended this panel, a soldout GW experience complete with an unusually tasty reception (a far cry from the routine GW nuggets and lemonade menu), I was blown away at the experience and the legacy packed onto one stage. Having these titans, dare I say seasoned gourmands, espousing knowledge and exhibiting such grace and playfulness, I was in awe. The experience, however, was brought swiftly to the ground by comments that bothered me long after the event. Some students, as I like to call them Foodie Leftists, could be heard complaining that the chefs, all of whom are highly rated in their field, were not doing enough to make fine dining sustainable. In one case, a student decided to make the argument that foie gras, a classic French preparation of goose or duck liver, was akin to the practice of human slavery, going so far as to invoke the words of Martin Luther King Jr. in defense of his animal pals. But what exactly are they trying to accomplish? If you ask me, which you now have by continuing to read my ranting and raving, theres something that the eco-friendly, sustainable / green / hippie crowd, lets call them the Green Group, have forgotten. Food isnt just a collection of nutrients. Food isnt just a flavor or a means to survive. It is all of these things combined and more. Food is an experience, something that brings people together and, in many ways, is a process that defines us culturally. Food is, I admit the terrible clich, the spice of life. I wont go into my thoughts on fringe groups, such as the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, otherwise known as a radical group that has logistically and financially supported known (and FBI listed) ecoterrorist organizations, but instead focus on the run-of-the-mill greenie. Weve come to a sad moment in this country, when, out of a sense of selfrighteous enlightenment, we decide as individuals that our collection of life experiences on this earth understands the world better than thousands of years of tradition and heritage. We decide that while our ancestors would embrace the opportunity to feast on the flesh of a wild animal, overjoyed at the possibility to enjoy a night by the fire roasting boar with good friends and family, that enjoying a steak dinner with business associates in todays day and age is second-hand murder. Im not defending every slaughterhouse from here to Hong Kong. Surely, there are cruel and unnecessary practices that are morally
Gastronomy Under Attack

By Zachary Gorelick If I were to use 100 percent grassfed beef at my restaurant Id be broke. I mean, I wouldnt be making the money. When Spike Mendelsohn spoke those words, a chill went down the spines of the audience. The liberal crowd of those supporting the efforts of sustainability was stunned. How could Mendelsohn, the accomplished restaurateur and chef of both Good Stuff Eatery and We the Pizza, say something so cruel to the movement? Bad turned to worse for the greeninclined as Todd Gray of Equinox shot down the last question about Fair Trades place in fine dining. That just builds another layer of complication, to be honest with you, he said to a silent room. At the Big Night, Big Jobs event, hosted by Sustainable GW, there was no shortage of disappointment for the eco-friendly crowd. From Nora Poullion discussing how to quarter meat or package cow testicles as exotic on a menu, to rising star Jos Andrs admission that we cannot be, as a chef, aware of every single thing that goes behind every single ingredient, things got ugly.
20
April - May 2011
wrong implemented to save money for large corporations. I am not defending anyone mistreating a living creature for sport or greed. I am saying, however, that eating an animal or, heaven forbid, a tomato that was farmed by an illegal immigrant, isnt a sin. Theres a reason we dont sit in the kitchen of our favorite restaurant. Oftentimes, we would be appalled at how much salt, or just how many
sticks of butter, are thrown into each dish that we heartily consume, night after night. The fact is: we dont know everything that has happened down the line. We cant control what bad people do with our food and we cant help the fact that a hamburger means dead cattle. We can, however, embrace life with an intense love for culture, tradition, and the food creations that are part of our society. When Im at Trader
Joes, I might look into the food aisle for a more environmental option. When Im questioning a leader in fine dining, however, Im not going to bitch about dead cows or suffering geese. Im going to thank them for their service to the science of gastronomy and ask them to tell me more. Otherwise, Ive wasted an amazing opportunity to learn from the craftsmen that will undoubtedly shape our generations food history.
Lights! Camera! Fashion!

By Danielle Gonzalez It could be that, between work and relationships, your life is unbearably stressful; you worry too much about what other people think, you always want to please everyone, your parents turned you into a Type-A uptight control freak. When Audrey Hepburn steps out of that yellow cab on Fifth Avenue and eats her Danish in front of the sparkling windows of Tiffanys, however, you forget all about your own world. I think its safe to say that the last thing on her mind is her economics midterm (or how many calories are in that Danish). For two glorious hours you get to be Holly Golightly and run around Manhattan in gorgeous hats and Givenchy LBDs. Your life is an endless parade of parties, suitors, and, of course, Tiffanys. Sure, you dont have any furniture and the concept of keys is challenging for you, but who cares? You certainly dont. Alright, so you may never have the life of a carefree party girl, and lets
hope that you can manage to hold on to a set of keys long enough to use them at least once, but you can have the best part of Miss Golightly: her style. Movie characters have their fair share of flaws, but their redeeming qualities are what make them memorable. What we love about them (other than their great style) is that theyre flawed like us. We like that theyre human. We can relate to them on some level, and we strive to be like them on another. For fashion lovers everywhere, Vogue and other important fashion publications are like bibles. But even the most loyal Vogue reader (myself included) is, on a subconscious level, more likely to be influenced by film than the magazines. Its not that the magazines are lacking imagination in any way, its just harder to relate to Kate Moss when shes decked in couture from head to toe, posing next to an elephant (or something just as outrageous). Testino, Demarchelier, and all of the best photographers of the fashion world are truly gifted at creating these moments and capturing them. The photographs are spectacular, but the moments are
surreal. Although movies are also often, well, movies: full of fantasy and things that would never happen in reality, they are more capable of influence than a magazine because they offer more than a snapshot; magazines, at their core, offer a lifestyle. We know something about these characters. We know how they speak and act. We know what they like and dislike. We know their good and bad qualities. We know their wants, and sometimes we even know their dreams. Finally, we, of course, know what they wear. And we dont just see what theyre wearing once, in a picture, but we get to see how they dress every day. No matter how beautiful the actor, theyre still people, not models (who are clearly another species). Some characters are on the curvier side, they may have a crooked tooth, a bump on their nose, or ugly feet. We still love these characters, and, whats more, we love them because of their little imperfections, not in spite of them. Case in point: Carrie Bradshaw, the fashion character icon of our time. Manolo Blanhiks, Carries absolute
21
favorite shoes, existed long before Sex and the City; yet it was only after Miss Bradshaw stepped out of her brownstone in those Manolos that the designer really entered mainstream culture. Carrie started wearing a gold nameplate necklace and suddenly every girl had one. Carrie owns a lot of designer pieces, and in fact (as another loyal reader) much of her closet first appeared on the glossy pages of Vogue. But it was Bradshaw, not Vogue, who inspired millions of girls to imitate the fashions. Designers, who quickly caught on, started sending the producers pieces they wanted the girls to wear on the show. It is, in fact, the clothing that has made the
Sex and the City movies some of the most costly to produce in the film industry. Some have even said that the clothes themselves are almost characters. Maybe this is why some of the looks, glamorous as they may be, seem inappropriate given the circumstances (really girls, thats what you chose to wear in the middle of the Abu Dhabi desert?). Thanks to Sex and the City, waves of Carrie Bradshaw wannabes invaded Manhattan clad in Manolos and Cosmos. These girls didnt just want her great style, they also wanted her life: breakfast with the girls in the morning, cocktails with the boys at night, and lots of shopping in
between. When we don the fabulous looks of our favorite stylish characters, we are trying to play that character, and we hope that not only will we look great, but also that the best part of him or her will rub off on us. Maybe if we wear Madonnas pyramid jacket from Desperately Seeking Susan, well be a bit braver. Maybe if we have Umas Pulp Fiction bob and dark Chanel nail polish, well be better dancers. Maybe if we rock Keatons Annie Hall menswear, well be quirkier. Or maybe if we wear Alicia Silverstones 90s knee-highs and plaid from Clueless, Paul Rudd will fall in love with us? As if!
Selling Exclusivity: How the Acquisition of Hermes Could Spell Disaster

By Andrew Hor While it may be true that companies legally have the right to acquire one another, the question remains if the acquisition will be healthy, even if the parent company has the means to expand. Could expansion actually bring negative growth? Consider the recent decision by French luxury conglomerate LVMH to buy a controlling share in Hermes. Known for their elusive Birkin and Kelly handbags, silk scarves and ties, Hermes maintains a modest profile. When LVMH acquired a 17.1% controlling share of the company last October, the Hermes family made no secret that they were opposed to intrudersthe company has long
been controlled by family members, and takes pride in its small size and personable heritage. For LVMH, Hermes is the perfect acquisition for expansion. The companys sales have recently skyrocketed due to large growth in Asian markets, as well as here in the United States. While most luxury brands were suffering the recession of 2008, Hermes posted record profits, largely due to the rationalization by consumers that quality items make strong investments. It has gathered a faithful customer base, which has created a cult-like following of its collectable scarves and ties. Ironically, it is this very customer that poses the greatest threat to the brand under a new owner. What LVMH underestimates in this desired acquisition is the delicate social balance that Hermes has mastered for their business. Take, for example, the companys most coveted
item, the Birkin bag, the hardest to find in its class. Hopefuls are often placed on a waiting list to receive the item, some of whom have been patiently waiting for years. Whether or not there is such a limited supply of these bags is questionable, but it is quite obvious that the company has a tight control of the social value of their products. Not only are they selling items, they are also selling a ticket of exclusivity. Besides, what good is buying something expensive when everyone else will have it? What LVMH sees in the deal is simply a strong performer that they hope to call their own. Unfortunately, they are failing to realize that their divide and conquer strategy of eating up brands and administering their own growth plans will fail with Hermes. Although it controls revered fashion houses such as Louis Vuitton and Christian Dior, these names have been mass produced and made widely available albeit at high price points. In
22
April - May 2011
the business of luxury goods, image is everything, and the overexposure and oversaturation of the market is a dangerous reality. There must be a balance of the quality of the good supplied and quantity of that good available on the market that needs to be maintained in order to attract a socially aware consumer. This is what Hermes has done right, and LVMH has done wrong. They have created desirable products on a controllable scale.
Hermes has long maintained an image of whimsy, innocence, and rarity that it encourages customers to buy into. Shattering the quaint emotions associated with the brand and associating it with a massive conglomerate (LVMH recorded over 20 billion in revenue in 2010) could alienate the companys target consumer. Although it makes logical sense to expand the company to reap larger profits, LVMH could essentially ruin the brands business
model by selfishly chasing expansion projects. What it is failing to see is that, although both companies sell luxury goods, the social structure that Hermes has crafted does not mix with LVMHs goals and reputation. As intelligent, motivated, and persistent as LVMH may be, they might not have the power to prevent Hermes from becoming deadweight in their portfolio. It may just have to be the one that gets away.
The Jefferson Hotels Sommelier

By Madison Noble The moment you enter through the doors of The Jefferson Hotel in downtown Washington D.C., you feel as if you have entered another time and place. This luxurious hotel finds its design inspiration in Thomas Jeffersons home, Monticello, as well as his travels throughout Europe. It was Jeffersons love of wine that led him to travel to Europes finest vineyards in countries such as France and Italy, and it is this love that inspired The Jeffersons vast wine collection. The Jefferson has approximately 1300 different bottles of wine, all of which have been procured by the Wine Director and Head Sommelier, Michael Scaffidi. Creative liberties were taken, says Scaffidi, but we tried to choose wines that Jefferson would have enjoyed today, based on those he chose when he was alive. Scaffidi elaborated on Jeffersons love of wine, His salary as president was $7500, $7000 of which he spent on wine.
Further, Jefferson believed that the United States could produce quality wines, on par with those of France or Spain. When asked whether or not American vineyards in states like California and Oregon have achieved such quality, Scaffidi responded, We havent gotten there yet. The vineyards of Europe have a history and an amount of experience that is just not there [in American vineyards]. Each bottle of wine has its own history to tell. It comes from a specific place, a point in time, and is the product of a certain climate. All of these factors work together to make a great bottle of wine. As a sommelier, one is expected to identify the grape, the year, and the region from which a bottle originates. It is like knowing the taste differences between say, a Washington apple and a Gala apple, its subtle, but its there, explains Scaffidi. While these remarkable skills must be acquired through extensive practice and studying, The Jefferson is offering classes to novices who want to get a taste for the life of a sommelier. The first class is called Secret Black Magic of a sommelier. We will teach how to tell wherea wine is from. I want to show people that anyone can do this, says Scaffidi.
Even if you only have $10 in your pocket, you can find a great wine. Just be open, advises Scaffidi. An allaround great wine is a Riesling, It is sweet, with hints of grapefruit and the alcohol content is low so you can drink a lot of it. If you really want to make dormroom staples special, drink wine. In college I used to drink a Chardonnay from Burgundy with my Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. Have a Ros Champagne with some French toast, apples, and bacon. Its delicious, one of my favorites, recommends Scaffidi. The key to becoming well versed in wine is experimentation. Start out in France, travel through each of the regions and then move on to Italy or Spain. Allow your taste buds to guide you. Take wine tasting classes at The Jefferson and become familiar with a local wine store; explore your options. Good wine is a necessity of life for me, Thomas Jefferson once said, so go ahead, make it a necessity of your life.
23
About The School of Washington Journal

The School of Washington Journal is GWs preeminent monthly publication covering business, politics, culture & arts, philosophy, sports, and career advice. Balanced between qualitative reporting and analytical essays, we wish to inform the GW student on issues that naturally appeal to the intelligent person.
TSWCN
The School of Washington Communications Network (TSWCN, or TSW) is a studentrun, diversified media group comprised of two newspapers, a weekly radio show, and an online forum. We print The School of Washington Journal and TSW Standard. Tune into our radio show, TSW Sports from A-Z, each week on Sunday from 1pm to 2pm on GWRadio. We are staffed by over 40 students of the George Washington University, sharing our passion for writing and entertaining with the rest of the community. Our topics of discussion extend well beyond the borders of campus, but from finance to philosophy to fashion, are always relevant to fun and intelligent life in Washington.
SchoolofWashington.org
Follow Us Online

TSW Journal Apr-May 2011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

TSW Journal Apr-May 2011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE SCHOOL OF WASHINGTON

A GWU Student Publication SchoolofWashington.org A Product of TSWCN

Economics & Finance

Science & Philosophy

Culture & Arts

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

- Advertisement for New Writers -

Conditum Anno Domini MMX

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Fork in the Road

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

Investing: Coinstar Inc.

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Mining Investments Around the Corner

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Religion and Truth

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

Same Sex Marriage and Civil Rights

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

indeed, we accept the existence of the government bureaucrat as a necessary evil).

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

The Russian Republic

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Mandate of Heaven: The Imperial Quing Restoration Organization

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Palestine is Nowhere: Prospects of a Third Intifada

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

March Madness 2011

Two Strikes and He Quits! Mannys Out

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Gastronomy Under Attack

April - May 2011

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

Lights! Camera! Fashion!

Conditum Anno Domini MMX

The S cho ol of Wa shington Jo u rn a l

Selling Exclusivity: How the Acquisition of Hermes Could Spell Disaster

April - May 2011

Catering to the Kem pt, t he Unke m pt, a nd t he Ur ba ne

The Jefferson Hotels Sommelier

Conditum Anno Domini MMX

About The School of Washington Journal

You might also like