Recently, I read an article, "Univ. of Chicago pushes back on trigger warnings, safe spaces" about a letter written by a dean of the University of Chicago to incoming freshmen. This letter summarizes the university's "commitment to freedom of inquiry and expression." This article inspired this post, so Intellectual Takeout gets some credit.
In our modern, sensitive society there has been a large increase in political correctness and general fear (or discomfort, possibly) of sharing opinions. This has resulted in some colleges and universities to avoid discussing topics that touch on “racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, cissexism, ableism, and other issues of privilege and oppression." Further, safe zones, areas where students can escape from topics that can be stressful, have been created in universities. Trigger Warnings, alerts that professors are expected to issue if something in a course might cause a strong emotional response, are also becoming popular.
I'll quote the University of Chicago on safe zones and trigger warnings, "Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so called ‘trigger warnings,’ we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own."
I applaud the University for taking this stance because colleges and universities are supposed to teach students how to think critically and expose students to different ideas. Political views shouldn't be based on emotion, they should be based on facts. Trigger warnings are for emotional safety not to genuinely protect students. Avoiding facts or ideas that are contrary to one's opinion or uncomfortable hurts students instead of helping them. The only way a student can develop opinions completely is to hear other viewpoints and facts that may be uncomfortable to them.
If you want to read the letter, it's posted below. And here's a link (click on the title) to an article titled "The Coddling of the American Mind" from The Atlantic, it provides an in-depth analysis of safe zones and trigger warnings.
Let me preface this by saying that Trump was not my first choice in the election this year. As I stated in my first post, I was a Ben Carson supporter and I wanted to vote for him. He was, and still is, my ideal presidential candidate. Carson, like Trump, is against political correctness and Washington cronyism, but Carson, unlike Trump, wasn't boisterous. Carson later endorsed Trump after he had to drop out of the race. His endorsement of Trump didn't surprise me due to Cruz's campaign lying about Carson dropping out before he actually dropped. Carson's endorsement of Trump did contribute towards my decision to vote Trump.
Donald Trump has said some things over the past year that have made me scratch my head, I'm not going to list them because all you need to do is the watch the news to hear them and we'd be here all day. Nonetheless, I am still voting for Trump and here's why: he's not as bad as Hillary Clinton and he has a chance of winning.
Third Party Candidates
I have accepted that elections are typically a choice between the lesser of two evils, so that eliminates the third party option. Third party candidates don't have a high chance of winning a presidential election and I don't want my vote to go to waste. I have done research on the third party candidates, Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Jill Stein of the Green Party, and I disagree with their parties' platforms and their individual ideas. There are some ideas from both Johnson and Stein that I do agree with. I'll give you some examples in the next paragraph.
Johnson supports term limits for Congress and he says that "his first major act as President will be to submit to Congress a truly balanced budget." There are other ideas that Johnson has that I agree, but I'm actually going to discuss this in another post. The main thing I agree with Stein on is repealing the USA PATRIOT Act, or at least some of it. Johnson and Stein both support the legalization of marijuana and I'm not completely opposed to that. I used to be completely opposed to the legalization of marijuana, but that's something I've changed on over the years.
Hillary Clinton and her policies
Hillary Clinton is crooked and dishonest with a long list of scandals. I don't think she really cares for this country at all based on her conduct in office. Let me list a few examples: she mishandled Benghazi, the whole email situation, The Clinton Foundation, and the "vast right-wing conspiracy". That last example is reaching back, but it can still apply. She does claim to stand up for women even though she didn't stand up for the women involved with Bill.
Clinton's policies aren't that awe inspiring to me either. I don't believe that our country can pay for debt-free college. Let's remember that the government doesn't have money, they use tax money. The government will have to increase taxes to pay for "debt-free" college, tax hikes do not help the middle class. And that's not the only thing Clinton wants the government to pay for; just think about that.
Specifically, regarding Clinton's tax plan. Her campaign site states, "Hillary will close tax loopholes like inversions that reward companies for shifting profits and jobs overseas." That sounds like a good policy because there are tax loopholes and those shouldn't exist. If she truly believes this, then why are billionaires like Warren Buffett, George Soros, and Michael Bloomberg backing her? I doubt they would want their taxes to be raised, so they must be concerned that Trump will rock the boat. Clinton won't rock the boat, she'll do the same old thing even though it's obviously not working for the country.
There are other policies I don't agree with, however, I won't discuss all of them in the interest of time. If you would like to read her policies, you can find them on her campaign site: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/
Donald Trump will at least admit that there are problems in America. We know Clinton will do the same thing as she has always done. Trump is going to different and that could be a good different. I'm willing to experiment with electing Trump because it can't get be any worse than Clinton.
Hello readers, I'm going to keep this short and sweet. Most of you probably know me and that's probably why you're here. For those of you who don't, my name is Zach Smith (that explains the link) and I'm 21 years old. As the title of this blog suggests, hopefully, I'm asking you to read my opinion on things, specifically politics. "Lend me your ears" comes from Julius Caesar by Shakespeare, not "With a Little Help From My Friends" by The Beatles. Even though I like that song it's not my inspiration.
Those of you who don't know me may be thinking, "Do I really want to hear a millennial talk about politics?" And I don't blame you if you do think that, after all the young voters were a big voting block for Obama. I wasn't old enough to vote in 2008 or 2012 though, so you can't blame me for Obama.
Anyway, I'm a conservative if you couldn't tell. I would say I'm a Cruz like conservative, but we saw at the GOP convention how Cruz turned out. Cruz only got my vote because Carson withdrew from the race before the North Carolina primary. Trump is my third option and I'll be voting for him, I will not vote for Clinton. I'll get to the 2016 election another time.
My reason for starting this blog is chiefly to give a conservative opinion on what is going on in the world because the mainstream media is biased most of the time. My other reason is to see if I can become a successful enough political blogger to maybe become professional.
So, my blog is officially ready to be read. I'm aiming at posting every week or two, so stay tuned.
And thanks for reading.
