Kenyon Observerthe

September 25, 2012

James Neimeister|page 6

Sodexo, a Story:

Kenyon Observerthe

November 15, 2012

Fred Hill | page 10

Kenyon’s oldest UndergradUate political and cUltUral Magazine

The Bride to Be Brazil’s Struggle to BalanceImage and Human Rights

Kenyon Observerthe

November 15, 2012

The Kenyon ObserverNovember 15, 2012

From the Editors

Cover Storyfred hill

The Bride to BeBrazil’s Struggle to Balance International Image and Human Rights

tommy brown

Election Rundown

james neimeister

Our Election DebacleA Polemic ConcerningElectoral Bureaucracy

stewart pollock

Singing Red and Smashing BlackThe Fallout of the Bo Xilai Scandal

conrad jacober

On ToleranceWestern Liberalism and theArt of Oppression

ryan mach

Dignity in DefeatThe Confessions of Mitt Romney, As Told to Ryan Mach

5

7

8

10

The Kenyon Observer is a student-run publication that is distributed biweekly on the campus of Kenyon College. The opinions expressed within this publication belong only to the writers, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Observer staff or that of Kenyon College.

The Kenyon Observer will accept submissions and letters-to-the-editor, but reserves the right to edit for length and clarity. All submissions must be received at least a week prior to publication. Submit to Sarah Kahwash (kah-washs@kenyon.edu) or Gabriel Rom (romg@kenyon.edu).

Cover Art by Nick Nazmi Quotes Compiled by Megan Shaw

Editors-in-Chief Gabriel Rom and Sarah Kahwash

Managing EditorYoni Wilkenfeld

Featured Contributors Tommy Brown, Fred Hill, Conrad

Jacober, Stewart Pollock andJames Neimeister

Content EditorsSarah Kahwash, Sofia Mandel,

Gabriel Rom and Yoni Wilkenfeld

Layout/Design Sofia Mandel

IllustrationsPeter Falls

Nick Nazmi

Faculty Advisor Professor Fred Baumann

12

14

5

Dear Prospective Reader,

As students prepare to return home for Thanksgiving Break, the Kenyon Observer presents coverage and analysis of recent developments both at home and abroad. We launch this issue with an overview of our recent election by Tommy Brown, followed by a glimpse into the shady world of electoral bureaucracy by James Neimeister.

On the global stage, Fred Hill contemplates the strains of the upcoming Olympics and World Cup on Brazil and the inhabitants of its favelas, while Stewart Pollock discusses the internal corruption within the Chinese political structure. Finally, Conrad Jacober examines the way in which the concept of tolerance has been depoliticized in contemporary American society.

We invite all members of the Kenyon community to consider the opinions printed here, and it is our hope that our discussion of political issues at the local, national and global levels will provoke contemplation and conversation beyond these pages. As always, we welcome letters and full-length submissions, both in response to content and on other topics of interest.

Gabriel Rom and Sarah KahwashEditors-in-Chief

FROM THE EDITORS

6

Comments? Complaints? Suggestions? Differing

Opinion?Get your voice in print by submitting a Letter to

the Editors or full-length article to TKO@kenyon.edu

7

We at the Observer believe that our readers are fully engaged in national and local politics, but in case you’ve been living under a rock or in blissful ignorance, take the opportunity to catch up on the highlights and results of this year’s election now.

Presidential ElectionPresident Obama was reelected with 332 electoral votes and 50.6 percent of the popular vote. Notable

highlights include the new influence of super PACs in a presidential election following Citizens United, the pending cabinet change-up of the Obama administration, the progressing influence of the Hispanic demographic and the debate over the influence of Hurricane Sandy on the outcome of the election.

Senate ElectionsThere was no change in the balance of power. The Democratic Party retains its majority, as well as pick-

ing up two additional seats. Notable highlights include Elizabeth Warren (D) unseating incumbent Scott Brown (R); the Democratic gain in Indiana after longtime Senator Dick Luger (R) lost in the primary to Tea Party candidate Richard Mourdock; the election of the first openly gay senator, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin.

Congressional ElectionsAs with the Senate, there was no change in the balance of power, with Republicans holding 234 seats.

Democrats did take five additional seats, but remain well within the minority at 198 seats. Notable high-lights include the impact of redistricting on many races over both newly created districts and consolidated districts.

Local ElectionsSenator Sherrod Brown (D) was reelected for his second term, as was Congressman Gibbs (R). Both

Issue 1, which routinely called for a state constitutional convention, and Issue 2, which would have created a citizen panel for redistricting, were turned down.

State ReferendumsGay marriage: Maine, Maryland and Washington were added to the list of states that have legalized gay

marriage, making a total of nine. They are the first, however, to do so through public referendum.

Legalization of MarijuanaColorado and Washington affirmed while Oregon denied public referendums to legalize marijuana

for recreational use. The passage of the referendums sets the stage for an interesting federalist debate, depending on whether the Obama administration chooses to challenge them, as marijuana is still illegal under federal law.

Election Rundown

TOMMY BROWN

“We would all like to vote for the best man, but he is never a candidate.” Kin Hubbard

TKO

Three months ago I could have never predicted what a frustrating and time-consuming saga trying to vote would become. It was late August and I printed out the appropriate forms, one to register to vote and another to request an absentee ballot. I intended to vote in my home district so that my vote would have an impact on the community I have always lived in, Cleveland. I double checked that my registration had indeed gone through, and it seemed that all I had to do was wait for my ballot to arrive in the mail.

Weeks later, that ballot still had not come. I called the board of elections for the first of what would be many times and was informed that my ballot had been sent back as “undeliverable” for unknown reasons. I was informed by the woman on the phone that she would personally send it to me immediately.

Apparently there had been some kind of miscom-munication, however, because what I ended up receiv-ing in the mail was not my ballot, but rather another application for a ballot. I filled out the form carefully and sent it back, making sure to ask that I could have it sent to my P.O. box and that all the information was in order. Again, I received no reply for almost two weeks, so I called the board of elections to find out what had happened. And again, I was told that they never re-

ceived any application; my registration was in order but either I would have to wait even longer or go vote in person.

So I waited. A week later I received a letter in the mail explaining that my application could not be pro-cessed: “This agency has tried to contact you through the United States Postal Service...the United States Postal Service has since returned the mail as being un-deliverable.” I’d had enough. It seemed that the only way I would be able to vote was to drive halfway across the state and vote in person.

The Friday before election day, I drove all the way to the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections in Cleveland only to have it explained to me by two kind, frazzled election officials that I could only vote provisionally. I had not returned an official change of address form they had sent me earlier, despite the fact that I had not changed addresses, and this had been the source of all my problems.

Still, I wonder why they would have tried to send me a ballot in the first place, and whether that has any-thing to do with the post office’s failure to deliver the ballot itself, despite its demonstrated ability to send an explanatory letter.

Regardless of whether those mistakes ultimately

Our Election Debacle

JAMES NEIMEISTER

8

“Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy.” Franz Kafka

A POLEMIC CONCERNING ELECTORAL BUREAUCRACY

9

mattered, I faced yet another obstacle the day I voted. Just before filling in the bubbles of my ballot, I noticed that the official I had been speaking to mixed up the numbers of my address while entering my information into the computer. Knowing that in the obsessive, ab-surdly particular world of bureaucracy such errors can be fatal, I pointed out the error. We needed to start over, print another form, and then look for and read-just every instance where that one small mistake had been replicated throughout the process. The official tried in vain to reassure me in vain that this would be done immediately and that I should just go on ahead.

Though I finally got to fill out my ballot and stuff it into the box, I felt no gratification — no sense that I had accomplished anything resembling the fulfillment of some sacred duty of democratic participation one imagines when going to vote.

This critique is an indication that even at its most basic and fundamental levels, our electoral system has become a complete and utter debacle. Not only are elections in this country referred to as a “horse race” on a regular basis, but even an operation as rudimen-tary as casting one’s ballot has the potential to become an absolute nightmare. During the early voting period in Florida, the lines at one of Miami’s early voting sta-tions were so long that officials made a decision sim-ply to shut down and stop counting votes. Meanwhile, Governor Rick Scott refused to extend early voting hours, arguing that it would be too costly. It is beyond comprehension how any governor, whether Democrat or Republican, could balk at spending money on what should naturally come as one the government’s primary duties.

These efforts, along with other measures like the push for stricter voter identification laws, have vastly complicated the electoral process and have made voting harder. Stories abound this cycle about irregularities at the polls and the difficulties people have had while vot-ing. One such example occurred when the reverend and

talking head Al Sharpton went to vote in his district in New York. Despite recognizing him as a celebrity, one poll worker asked him to show his identification before he voted because the worker had heard so much about voter identification laws on MSNBC and had thus misunderstood them. In his defense, the election worker was not the only one exercising caution. The New York Times reports that voters nationwide waited longer than average in this election, due in large part to volunteers on the defensive. Among other things, this resulted in an unusually high number of provisional ballots cast in Ohio.

Yet Republicans’ attempts to minimize early vot-ing periods and push for voter ID laws complicate the electoral process are not the only problems facing our democracy. The rise of super PACs, the unprecedent-ed and exponential rise in campaign spending and the narrative-engineering practiced by the media and politi-cal consultants present even greater threats to the in-tegrity of the democratic process in the United States. As enormous special interest groups wield ever greater influence, as more money is spent on candidates repre-senting fewer citizens and as candidates hire armies of people to craft perfectly tailored messages that neither offend nor excite, we witness the gradual decomposi-tion of American democracy.

We have seen in our lifetime the emergence of some kind of hideous electoral-industrial complex. Even as most of the money Barack Obama spends comes from a greater number of donors who donate in smaller amounts, these enormous hoards of cash feed into the same system: the political rumor mills, the campaign consulting firms, the clever and insidious ad agencies. None of this work has any real value to our economy but to perpetuate its legitimacy in spite of its injustices. It is nothing but a complete waste; regardless, it takes money out of people’s pockets, effectively burning it over some thinly-veiled charade.

Is it really so much to ask, then, that the funding for elections be taken as a public expense and doled out evenly? Rather than attempting to reform or regulate the campaign conundrum, we would be better off sim-ply cutting the Gordian knot. The slate must be wiped clean. The influence of money over politics must be stamped out, thus eliminating the material source of the hollow, carefully constructed campaigns that have developed in recent years, getting rid of the dominance of the ever more out of touch two party system and saving billions of dollars which — whether comprised of tax dollars or otherwise — come from groups and individuals that could use the money in better ways.

“Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist.” George Carlin

TKO

“even at its Most basic and fUndaMental levels, oUr electoral systeM has be-coMe a coMplete and Utter debacle.”

10

FRED HILL

As London prepared for the 2012 Summer Olympics, city-dwellers took advantage of the opportunity to in-dulge the national hobby of grumbling: tourist traffic, inconvenient bus rerouting, impossible-to-get-restaurant reservations. The gentle patter of complaints was as persistent, predictable and non-intrusive as the London drizzle.

Lush, troubled Brazil hopes to achieve more than the low-key success of last summer’s games. After winning their bids for both the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympics, Brazil has a unique opportunity to claim a cen-tral place on the global stage. The stakes are high, but the difficulties will mean more than tedious commutes and overcrowded sidewalks.

Rio de Janeiro, one of 12 cities hosting the World Cup and the host city for the Olympic Games, boasts both Brazil’s new wealth and old inequality. Expensive glass homes and hotels wrap around a pristine shoreline while the densely-packed, jerry-built housing complexes known as favelas teeter on the cliffs. World Cup construc-tion plans to clear out these communities have awakened larger issues about social stratification and reform in Bra-zil. Can these mega-events bring real progress as well as publicity? What is being lost, and what could be gained?

It is easier to envision loss. Favela translates as “self-made,” and scenes of life from a favela exemplify the tenacity of the human spirit. Bright flags adorn metal roofs, houses are striped with sunset-colors of paint, children and dogs dart through the zigzag streets, duck-ing under tangles of wire that course with illegally ob-tained electricity. Life persists even in the most danger-ous, impoverished places. Widely available pictures of

the clearances show women weeping and gathering piles of clothing. Armed guards barricade people from their homes as they line up in front of their houses, refusing to leave.

Raquel Rolnik, rapporteur of a United Nations com-mittee on World Cup construction, has pointed to issues of transparency. Many inhabitants of the favelas were startled to discover that wealthy politicians had chosen to sacrifice homes there for the common good of in-ternational prestige. Recompense is pitifully inadequate, particularly as Rio’s real estate prices skyrocket. A family who loses their house may get enough money to buy a mixed drink at a hip bar in the Ipanema area.

In those favelas allowed to remain, federal police have been sent in. Wary of the violent conflicts that resulted from similar clearance initiatives for the 2007 Pan-Amer-ica Games, the federal government has created “pacifying police units” (Unidade de Policia Pacificadora) known as UPPs, stationed long-term. These pacifying units have been a general success, but in several cases, corrupt of-ficers have begun participating in the local drug trade. In the roughest and most established favelas, such as the Complexo de Alemao, engagement with armed police-men more nearly resembles warfare. Ominously, the ve-hicles of federal police are known as the caveirao or “Big Death.”

Although favelas are unsanctioned and technically ille-gal, Brazil’s usucapião or adverse possession policy gives the right to file for ownership after five years of constant occupation. Many have lived in these shantytowns for decades, organizing unofficial systems for transport and electricity. The powerful attachment to these neighbor-

“There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice,but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.” Elie Wiesel

The Bride to BeBRAZIL’S STRUGGLE TO BALANCE INTERNATIONAL

IMAGE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

11

hoods became evident in the 1993 “Cingapura” fiasco, a rehousing initiative named in honor of Singapore’s ef-ficient system. In an attempt to clean up the favelas sur-rounding San Paulo, high-rises were built equipped with all modern conveniences, and move-ins were forced. The massive, shiny buildings were left abandoned as residents slipped back to their untidy neighborhoods on the hills. The still-empty buildings speak to the importance of community involvement in reshaping favela life.

Janice Perlman’s 1970s study “The Myth of Marginal-ity” interpreted the favela as symbol and apparatus of Brazil’s economic vitality. As urban migration surged, determined young people formed communities on the outskirts of cities they could not afford to live in, bring-ing creativity, energy and labor. The legitimacy of Perl-man’s thesis disguises a dangerous romanticization of the favelas. Human spirit alone cannot reinforce crumbling cinder-block masonry and corrugated metal shacks, and neighborly camaraderie will not keep an entire neighbor-hood from falling to pieces in a landslide, as Favelo Moro do Bumba did in the spring of 2010.

Inefficient or non-existent water access poses a health risk to denizens and an environmental risk to the wa-ters of Rio. Lack of roads and public transport reinforce the favelas insularity and block off avenues for income expansion and social mobility. But the central problem of favela life, well-documented in popular movies and literature, is the gang and drug culture that dominates these communities and perpetuates Brazil’s narcotics trafficking. These isolated, unmonitored communities enable the deliberate torture of pesky journalists or the accidental killings of children who stray in the line of a bullet. Without other means of income, youth are drawn into the business, establishing a vicious cycle and a per-manent battlefield within the favela.

Planners cannot, in most cases, preserve the physi-cal favelas themselves, but should respect their empha-sis on self-making and self-determination. Meaningful urban spaces are created by people from bottom-up. Rather than imposing an “ideal” blueprint, architects and planners must consider existent structures as well as the needs and wishes of the people who live in them.

Careful surveying of the actual landscape in order to determine which land is viable and safe for permanent habitation is crucial, as favelas are often stitched together atop hilly or undulating terrain, landfills or flood-prone lands. Making such surveys available and accessible to even the illiterate, through community meetings, would be an important step towards including all those affected in these vast and necessary changes. A substantial chunk of money should be spent on in situ improvements of technical services — waste removal, water, electricity.

When displacement must happen, new housing, tem-porary or permanent, must be provided — rather than assigned. Finally, funds should be spent to foster com-munity development through the creation of community centers and legal support to clarify and advocate for le-

galization of housing rights and regularization of rent.Mega-events in developing countries have been both

catalysts and demonstrations of economic liberalization and development. A blazing display of Brazil’s achieve-ments may trump mundane urban improvement. The 2008 Beijing Olympics chose this route, trimming away unsightly slums with blithe disregard for human rights. But the futuristic The Bird’s Nest is in danger of be-coming a 21st century Ozymandias, without a function beyond pomp and spectacle.

The prioritization of awe over legacy led to the for-mation, in 2000, of the Olympics Games Global Impact Committee to consider the long-term impact of the games on the host city. Brazil’s expressed intention for a sustainable program of improvement played a key role in their selection. But Brazil’s elites estrangement from the common folk means their grievances carry little weight.

The callous dismissal of protesters provokes outrage, heightened by the long shadows cast by brutal favela clearances by the military dictatorship of the 1960s and 1970s. It is exciting to see marginalized citizens standing up for their rights and resisting capitalist greed. Yet the self-sufficiency claimed is ultimately not empowering but self-defeating, hindering unification and assimilation. Re-shaping densely populated urban infrastructure will nev-er go smoothly. Rather than condemning the endeavor, concern should be for the process, demanding meticu-lous record-keeping and greater transparency, encourag-ing community involvement.

Like a bride-to-be on a juice fast, Brazil has been swal-lowing dubious things for the sake of the photo-op. But Brazil should keep its eyes trained beyond the closing ceremony, refining their plans in order to take full ad-vantage of this chance to reshape not only their inter-national image but the material realities of their most impoverished citizens.

“If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.” Louis D. Brandeis

TKO

Illustration by Peter Falls

12

STEWART POLLOCK

Monitoring Chinese politics can feel more like an art than a science, thanks to the ruling Commu-nist Party’s aggressively opaque nature. Especially at the highest levels of the China’s leadership, little of-ficial information is ever made available, leaving ample room for speculation and guesswork. When China’s next presumptive leader, Xi Jinping disappeared in ear-ly September, canceling a series of public appearances as well as a meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, theories on what caused his absence ranged from cancer treatment to an assassination attempt. Upon Xi’s reappearance two weeks later, the state run news agency Xihua made no reference to the cause of his disappearance. The highest echelons of China’s leadership increasingly match the description Winston Churchill once gave to the Soviet Union as “a riddle wrapped in a mystery, inside of an enigma.”

In light of incidents like this one, the scandal sur-rounding Bo Xilai, a now disgraced member of the Communist Party, is all the more shocking for how public it has been. The fall of Bo, the former Chongq-ing party boss who was once believed to be on the short list to ascend to the premiership, has been as dramatic as it was rapid. The widely reported murder trial of Bo’s wife, Gu Kailai, along with the recent conviction of former police chief and whistle blower

Wang Lijun, have made Bo a well-known figure outside of China. Perhaps more significantly, however, such incidents have also blurred what impact he and other leftist, anti-liberal leaders will have on the future of the world’s most populous country.

The story of Bo Xilai’s downfall began in Febru-ary when Chief Wang fled to the United States con-sulate in Chengdu, near Bo’s home city of Chongq-ing. Seeking asylum, Wang claimed knowledge of the 2011 murder of Neil Haywood, a British businessman. Specifically, Wang had found that Haywood was likely murdered by Gu Kailai and her bodyguard after a busi-ness deal went sour. When he attempted to confront Bo, who was both Gu’s husband and his own boss, Wang was transferred, demoted and eventually fired. The high profile nature of Wang’s attempt to gain asy-lum in the U.S. Embassy resulted in considerable loss of face for Bo, and when it became clear that Gu was likely responsible for the murder, Bo was stripped of his position, his party titles and eventually his mem-bership to the Communist Party, clearing the way for his arrest.

While the drama of the Heywood murder has high-lighted the enormous corruption at China’s top levels, it also overshadows some of the nuances of internal Chinese politicking. Bo is, or rather was, a major ad-

“I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report facts.” Will Rogers

Singing Red andSmashing Black

THE FALLOUT OF THE BO XILAI SCANDAL

13

vocate of China’s “new Left” which, paradoxically, represented a very conservative force in the country’s politics. Specifically, his “Chongqing Model” which he used to govern that city eschewed a combination of pragmatic market reforms and adherence to strict Maoism. He and other new Leftist acted as a force of conservatism, opposing the economic liberalization favored by Beijing. Bo was also an ardent opponent of organized crime — his “Sing red and Smash black” campaign against alleged gangsters relied on a mixture of his trademark populism and promotion of “red” culture and song dating back to the Cultural Revolu-tion. His personal appeal made him a superstar within Chongqing, but his heavy-handedness and disregard for legal proceedings when prosecuting “gangsters” made him plenty of enemies both inside Chongqing and in Beijing.

Although it is unclear whether Bo was directly in-volved in the Heywood murder, it is abundantly clear that he was hardly as idealistic as his public persona suggested. In fact, Bo’s anti-crime crusade seems to have many of the features normally associated with a Maoist purge. Some of those rounded up by the Chongqing police were successful businessmen whose power threatened Bo’s own grip on state run business-es. One such victim, Li Jun, was one of the province’s 30 richest men. After he got into a land dispute with the government, Li found himself under increasing pres-sure from the police force headed by Xi. In the end, according to the Financial Times, Li “transferred own-ership of his properties to his brother, Li Xiuwu and his nephew Tai Shihua…[He] also divorced his wife in an effort to protect her and their two young daughters, and fled Chongqing.” Li was later kidnapped by police who tortured him for extended periods in an attempt to extract confessions to crimes ranging from bribery to pimping to gun-running. Li is just one of countless beneficiaries of China’s economic liberalization who have suffered under Bo’s crackdown.

Bo Xilai’s disgrace has greatly diminished the clout

of China’s new Left, but the latter still exists as a po-tent and growing force on the conservative fringe of Chinese society and politics. And the new Left is un-usually diverse. A variety of low-ranking government officials, writers, and overseas activists all agree with Bo’s position — that the negative consequences of economic liberalization have outweighed the benefits. Yet it is ultimately a regressive stance. Similar to how many Russians have looked back fondly on Stalinism — a poll in 2008 ranked him the third greatest Rus-sian — these new leftists have a taken a rose-tinted perspective of Mao and the Great Leap Forward. Bo himself should know this: during the later stages of the Cultural Revolution, his father Bo Yibo was de-nounced as a “Counterrevolutionary” and imprisoned, only released after Mao’s death and the overthrow of the leftist “Gang of Four”.

In any event, China’s once-a-decade transition of power looks to go off as planned this December. Dur-ing the 2012 Communist Party Congress President Hu Jintao and other members of the “Old Guard” will cede their power to younger leaders, including Xi, who will almost certainly assume the presidency. In other circumstances, it could have been Bo who took the helm of the world’s fastest growing power. That he did not seems to be a good thing: Bo’s ruthlessness and reactionary politics would have done little good for either China or the world. It is very likely a Bo Xilai led China would reverse the course set by Deng Xiaoping in the wake of Mao’s death, instead return-ing to the violence and nationalism of the Cultural Revolution. Instead of attending the conference, Bo will be preparing to go on trial. His wife, Gu Kailai, has already pleaded guilty to the charges of murdering Heywood, and been given a suspended death sentence — suspended only due to some speculation that the woman who appeared in court was a paid replacement for Gu. Wang, for his part, has not been seen recently, undoubtedly devoured by the labyrinthine Chinese le-gal system.

If anything can be inferred from the story of Bo Xilai, it is that China’s leaders are more than willing to destroy one of their own if they so much as suspect him of violating the party line. Bo was one of the most powerful and dangerous men in China, and yet despite this, or perhaps because of it, the Politburo standing committee have done their best to render him an “un-person” inside China. In this case, their aggressive-ness may have aided China’s liberalization and stopped a dangerous populist renegade. But it can hardly be called an act of altruism, instead reminding the world that China is determined to continue building its po-litical and economic clout, no matter what it takes.

“An empty stomach is not a good political adviser.” Albert Einstein

TKO

“bo Xilai’s disgrace has greatly diMinished the cloUt of china’s new left, bUt the latter still eXists as a potent and growing force on the conservative fringe of chinese society and politics.”

TKO

“It’s easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of Capitalism.” David Harvey

The concept of tolerance pervades the social, political and ideological realm of our society, but its current form is a denigration of the hopes and possibilities of tolerance. Tolerance has been emp-tied of its content. In our enlightened Western so-ciety, we tolerate oppression, repression, violence, apathy and the reigning powers that be. We do not actively tolerate these, but rather passively so. In tacit acceptance of a government and ruling order that executes oppression and violence both domes-tically and internationally, we passively tolerate and accept the structures of domination that leads to the widespread misery of mankind.

In Herbert Marcuse’s essay, “Repressive Tolerance,” he states that “the toleration of the systematic moronization of chil-dren and adults alike by publicity and propaganda...[is] the essence of a system which fosters tolerance as a means for perpetuating the struggle for exis-tence and suppressing the alternatives.”

This is the core of tolerance in our society. Toler-ance necessarily calls for an amount of intolerance, in that one can not be tolerant of two opposites.

In tolerating free speech, we are intolerant towards its opposite, that being the suppression of speech. Similarly, by being tolerant of the dominance of the ruling order, we find ourselves intolerant of radical alternatives that would overturn that ruling order. As Marcuse says, this tolerance perpetuates human misery and suffering whilst necessarily sup-pressing alternatives to this ruling order.

To ground this in something more tangible, note the state of our society. We tolerate massive num-bers of civilian casualties resulting from wars born of economic interests, the structural violence and de-crepitude of stark poverty and rising inequality, hid-eous amounts of wealth

wasting in the hands of a select few, military spend-ing that dwarfs the programs that would foster the lives and lessen the misery of large swathes of our own people, and a host of other global ills. We are not a tolerant society. A truly tolerant society would call for intolerance of oppression and the degradation of mankind and the planet. Our ideo-logical tolerance serves oppression of the masses by a select few who benefit from that oppression.

On Tolerance

CONRAD JACOBER

14

WESTERN LIBERALISM AND THE ART OF OPPRESSION

“oUr ideological tolerance serves oppression of the Mass-es by a select few who bene-fit froM that oppression.”

“The philosophers have only interpreted the world; the point is to change it.” Karl Marx

Whereas tolerance should be viewed as an end in itself on the same level as the end of human eman-cipation, we find tolerance as a means to sequester and silence alternatives and opposition to the sta-tus quo.

Tolerance should not be a passive state whereby one is tolerant of the evil that surrounds ones daily life; it should be an active state whereby one is in-volved in a constant struggle against that evil of violence and oppression which rears its head in the structures and infrastructure of our neoliberal so-ciety. We must fight the sort of tolerance in which, as Marcuse states, “the stupid opinion is treated with the same respect as the intelligent one.”

We see this tolerance toward gross misinforma-tion and absurd relativism all throughout our so-ciety. Organs of a corporate propaganda machine that call themselves “news” sources are well-known examples. Tolerance in our society claims to be rel-ative, fair and value-free. Contrary to this dogma, there is nothing value-free in the murder of hun-dreds of thousands of innocent civilians in unjust wars or in the starvation and misery of billions of impoverished people at the hands of neoliberal organs like the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, both of which serve wealthy investors in extracting as much wealth from third-world de-

veloping nations as possible. Do we really tolerate? No, we suffer. We suffer not only these miseries but an ingrained ideology that fights against ques-tioning and struggling for possible alternatives. Occupy Wall Street is laughed at and crushed by police raids. The very possible is made impossible. Alternatives are strangled and starved of air while the status quo triumphs. The language of “another world is possible” withers.

We must radicalize tolerance. Just as we are in-tolerant of the destruction of the Unity House flags, so must we be intolerant towards those who hawk for unjust and unnecessary wars, those who support structures of violence and poverty and those who spread misinformation and propaganda. Tolerance must not be passive and apathetic, but active and diligent in its strides for justice and hu-man emancipation. Tolerance is a useful concept. We must reclaim it and redefine it from its current supposedly value-free state to that of an admittedly partisan goal — one engaged in an active struggle for alternatives and human emancipation.

Herbert Marcuse’s essay “Repressive Tolerance” can be found at http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetolerance.htm.

15

TKO

Nite Bites CaféDon’t Study on an Empty Stomach!

Smoothies! Coffee! Paninis!

Nothing more expensive than $3.50!Advertisement

My fellow Americans,

This election has been a difficult chapter of my life, as I’m sure you can imagine. Though I know I had my supporters, the critics of my policies and candidacy have been relent-less. Citing my “quasi-sentient” persona, my detractors have made me out again and again to be a candidate that the people didn’t un-derstand, could never really get to know.

Now that the election is over and I finally have no chance of becoming the next presi-dent of the United States, I am willing to lay some things on the table for the American people. Here are some things I could neversay but often felt over the past year.

1. Though I often distanced myself from him during the campaign, I love Donald Trump. I think he is very intelligent, very presidential, and that I would like very much to be the America’s next Celebrity Apprentice.

2. Backstage, Ron Paul held a gun to my head for no apparent reason several times throughout the primary debates, only to put it back into its leather holster and mutter, “can’t tax a bullet.”

3. Tagg is obviously my favorite but Josh is the worst. It is only because of your mother that you remain alive, Josh. Remember that. Always.

4. Despite my leaked comments regarding 47 percent of Americans that arguably cost me the election, I don’t really think that almost half of the electorate is lazy, tax-evading and ignorant. I have no clue what 47 per-cent of America is like. I have only a hazy, confusing idea of what 99 percent of America is like. But that’s what the people who were giving me money wanted me to say. You try raising billions of dollars to elect a weird Mormon president of the United States and see how easy it is.

5. Newt Gingrich reeks of cat urine.6. I had motion sickness after getting off of a plane in Ohio and vomited on a pregnant mother of four. I had

to pay everyone around ten thousand dollars not to tell anyone.7. Also contrary to what I said in my concession speech, I no longer care about the fate of the American

people/dream.

That, America, is a load off my chest. I wish all of you the best of luck as you deal with the challenges facing modern Americans each and every day. Whether you’re a small business owner fighting against government regulation for a chance at financial success or an ordinary wage worker making an honest living, I am fighting for you, not as a candidate, but as a businessman. But remember: I have no idea who you are or what it is that you want.TKO

RYAN MACH

Dignity in Defeat

Illustration by Peter Falls

THE CONFESSIONS OF MITT ROMNEY, AS TOLD TO RYAN MACH

Romney appears on the Taxi Cab Confessions episode airing this Christmas.