MAY 2012 VOLUME 8 • ISSUE 2

2012 ElectionsCandidates on the Issues 6-7 AS WELL AS:

GOP Candidate Gaffes, 3Occupy Wall Street, 10-11

THE CHARIOT

MAY 20122

EDITORS-IN-CHIEFZach Ameri Jean Wang

PUBLICITYCharles Liu

TREASURERChristine Kyauk

CONTRIBUTING WRITERSDrew Bent

Chloe BlanchardAnh-Tram BuiHelen Carefoot

Sarah Dukes-SchlossbergWayland Fong Laura Grimm

Christina Hobbs Jesse Hoshizaki

Eric Hu Cara Lai Ryan Lee

Charles Liu Joseph Nicolls

Catherine Nitta Eric Noh

Sonal Prasad

The Chariot would like to thank the following sponsors and

patrons:

FOUNDATION/GROUP SPONSORSAdobe Systems • Daughters

of the American Revolution • Palo Alto Lions Club

PATRONS ($100+)

SPONSORS ($50-99)

CONTRIBUTORS ($21-50)

The Chariot would also like to thank Advisor Marc Igler for

his support.

ABOUT US

The Chariot is intended to create and promote political discussion at Gunn and make people aware of issues that matter. We ask that you respect all opinions which are reflected in our publi-cation, and write letters to the editors if you wish to voice your opinion. The views expressed do

not reflect that of The Chariot, but rather those of the individual writers.The Chariot was originally founded in 2001 as The Partisan Review by Gunn alumni Ilan Wur-

man (‘06), Channing Hancock (‘06), and Sarah McDermott (‘05).

Visit our website, www.gunnchariot.com if you wish to view any issues from previous years or for more information about us. Any questions, comments, suggestions, or requests to join can be

sent to gunnchariot@gmail.com.

If you’d like to make a donation or subscribe, please send checks to:Marc Igler

Re: The Gunn Chariot780 Arastradero RoadPalo Alto, CA 94306

Checks can be made out to Gunn High School with “The Chariot” on the memo.

DEAR READERS,“The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.” John F. Kennedy was the

35th president of the United States of America in 1961, but his wise words remain relevant today. In the presidential election of 2008, only 63% of eligible voters even managed to cast a ballot. Of those 63%, how many of them were informed about the real issues at hand, rather than blinded by propaganda commercials and Super PAC driven campaigns? As a politically driven publication, we at The Chariot believe it is our duty to provide the means for the public to learn about the candidates so they can make informed decisions. Many students are reaching voting age. It is our responsibility as Americans to support and vote for the candidates who represent our individual opinions, but it is even more important that we understand our opinions and why we have them.

We’ve assembled an easy to digest layout that explains the policies and viewpoints of the candi-dates for the 2012 presidential election. Ranging from energy, economic policy, and the ever increas-ing prices of rent, each candidate has slightly different policy, regardless of their party affiliation. As the Republicans duke it out for the presidential nomination, it’s important to know what they bring to the table as contenders against Barack Obama.

If you are interested in making your opinion heard or exploring your interests in journalism, we encourage you to join our staff as a writer, cartoonist or layout personnel. We are especially look-ing for non-seniors who would lead The Chariot in future years. We also welcome the submission of comments, article ideas, and guest opinions. The Chariot is expanding beyond simply politics and students with passionate opinions on issues that relate to students, culture, or the world are highly encouraged to join.

The Chariot remains the only independent, free Gunn publication without advertisements that is completely run by students. We depend on your donations as well as those from the community organizations to continue our publication. Any donations are greatly appreciated, and more infor-mation can be found on our website, www.gunnchariot.com.

Sincerely,

Zach Ameri & Jean Wang EDITORS-IN-CHIEF

Note: There was was mistake made with this issue of The Chariot. One of our staff members printed a draft version of the Chariot. This version has an incorrect staff list as well as several typographic errors. What you are reading right now is the real, final issue. Please pardon this mistake and enjoy.

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

MAY 2012 3

For better or worse, presidential can-didates are often defined by mis-takes made along the campaign trail.

Some are the candidates’ fault, while others are exaggerations by their rivals to make them look like real issues (think Howard Dean’s “Dean Scream” in the 2004 Demo-cratic Primary). One or two bad gaffes can ruin a candidate’s chance of being elected, and many of the one-time candidates for this year’s Republican nomination were phased out by a single mistake.

Of all the candidates from this election cycle, Rick Perry has had the most memo-rable gaffes. After a poor performance in Iowa (Perry was fifth with little over 10% of the vote), he has said he will be return-ing to Texas to contemplate his next move. His downfall was spelled out after several embarrassing mistakes in early debates and press conferences beginning in November. His most mentioned mistake is failing to remember which departments he would cut on CNBC in Michigan. He struggled to name one of the nine Supreme Court justices with “Montemayor?” in the same sentence that he insult the court as “eight unelected and frankly unaccountable judges.” In December, Perry again made two mistakes in the same sentence, when during a speech a town hall meeting, he said, “Those of you that will be 21 by No-vember the 12th, I ask for your support and your vote. Those of you who won’t be, work hard.” (The voting age is 18, and the election isn’t on the 12th.) Later on, he spoke of the “New Hampshire caucuses.” They’re primaries. In an effort to remove suspicions about signing a law supporting the HPV vaccine, Perry made a bizarre and incorrect statement saying a woman dying of cervical cancer lobbied him to sign. In fact, he met the woman after he had signed the bill. His most recent gaffe involves an ad railing against Obama’s “war on reli-

gion” in which he says that religion will be a driver of success in the country’s future and claims that “there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school.”

Cain and Gingrich were phased out due to questions about sexual harassment and extramarital affairs, respectively. During Cain’s sexual harassment allegations ordeal he accidentally “confirmed” that the son of one of his accusers worked at Politico, a political newspaper, despite the fact that she has no children (he was merely a man with the same last name). Cain claimed at one point that China was “trying to devel-op nuclear capability,” which they did over forty years ago. He also asserted that the Taliban was going to rule Libya, despite them being on different continents. Gin-grich suffered much media coverage for harassing Romney about his health care law after it was pointed out that he himself

had supported such a law. One of Gin-grich’s largest mistakes, which led to his downfall, was his job as a “historian” for Freddie Mac from which he netted $1.5 million, which seems quite unreasonable. It is more likely he was simply a lobbyist.

In a Romney campaign ad, he made an allegation that Obama’s policies on the economy were faulty, attributing to Obama the statement “if the election is about the economy, we lose.” This statement was, in fact, made by a McCain aide in the 2008 campaign. The Romney campaign later is-sued a statement saying the mistake was made on purpose to show the state of Obama’s policies. Yet, the political climate right now is such that it is difficult (read: impossible) to believe that any campaign would intentionally spread information it knew would return to hurt it once re-vealed. More likely than not, it was, as with many incidents in the past election season, just another political gaffe.

GOP Candidate GaffesSarah Dukes-Schlossberg

THE CHARIOT

MAY 20124

Drew BentContributing Writer

The presidential campaign season is here and although the topic makes for great conversation around

campus, most Gunn students will not be allowed to vote in the upcoming election. The voting age in the United States has been 18 years for the past four decades. Yet, one has to wonder why the law treats minors as adults in certain areas of soci-ety, such as in criminal offenses, but fails to give them their proper representation in the government. Is it time for the US to join nations like Brazil and Austria and lower the voting age?

Although the majority of nations have the seemingly arbitrary voting age of 18, a few countries have led the pack by institut-ing lower voting ages. In 1984, Nicaragua was the first to lower it to the young age of 16. At one point, Iran even had it set at 15. Brazil, one of the fast-growing developing nations, has followed suit by lowering their voting age to 16.

Lowering the voting age makes for a tricky problem. A minimum age has to be set at some point - you can’t just let tod-dlers go to voting booths and choose the

president on Election Day. This leaves the need to align the voting age with some other well-known benchmark. For exam-ple, letting 16 year olds vote seems reason-able since they are already considered ma-ture enough to drive at that age.

Although many regard adulthood as starting at age 18, there are teenagers younger than that who have taken on adult responsibil i-ties in society. Kids in the U.S. can legally work starting at 14. In fact, 22.7 million youths have a job or are cur-rently looking for one. Like any adult, they pay taxes and are the part of the labor force. However, unlike adults, they don’t reap all the benefits.

Minors often suffer adult punishments in the criminal justice system as well. In many states, despite being under 18, crimi-nals can be charged as adults. In New York, 16 and 17 year olds fall in this category.

The double standard that teenagers and young adults experience is not new. Look-ing back, the U.S. voting age was originally set at 21. When the Vietnam War struck, a movement began to lower it to 18. At the time, it was possible to be a teenager who was drafted in the war and yet still didn’t have the right to vote. People became

aware of the situation and an amendment lowering the age to 18 passed.

Another amend-ment lowering the voting age would be beneficial to the U.S. Not only could it po-tentially increase the number of voters by millions, it would also introduce a new de-mographics’ perspec-

tive to the government. The youth, who are some of the most active and energetic citizens in this country, could take part in influencing the political system. Sound good? Unfortunately, those to whom the amendment applies are never going to have the chance to vote on it under the current system.

Youth’s right to VOTE

Yet, one has to wonder why the law treats mi-

nors as adults in certain areas of society, such as in criminal offenses, but fails to give them their

proper representation in the government

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

MAY 2012 5

First there was Michelle Bachmann, who won the Ames Straw Poll in Iowa over the summer and seemed poised to take that state in the January primary. Af-ter several verbal gaffes and the emergence of Rick Perry, Bachmann fell from the top of the GOP Presidential Nominee race and, after a dismal showing in the Iowa Caucus, suspended her campaign.

Then, there was Rick Perry, who shot to the top after entering the race in Au-gust, with many hoping he would become a conservative icon with his folksy attitude and economic record as Governor of Tex-as. After Perry stumbled in debate after debate, however, Perry faded into obscu-rity as the months rolled on.

After Perry was Herman Cain, the for-mer CEO of Godfather’s Pizza. Cain floated to the top due to his easy-to-com-prehend 9-9-9 tax plan (nine percent flat tax, nine percent corporate flat tax, nine percent national sales tax). In October, Cain led the polls. In November, his entire campaign fell apart when reports came out about Cain’s previous history and allega-tions of sexual harassment and infidelity.

Soon after, Cain too suspended his cam-paign.

Newt Gingrich, the speaker of the house during the 1990s, rose from the hastily-dug grave that was his campaign to assume the role of frontrunner in Decem-ber. Many assumed he was finished af-ter a disastrous se-ries of interviews in May and loss of his main campaign staff in June, but he managed to stay alive long enough to take over the front-runner slot when Cain fell away.

Finally, with the first two primaries (Iowa and New Hampshire) finished, the only candidate whose poll numbers had re-mained consistently at the top - Mitt Rom-ney - has claimed the frontrunner status, seemingly for good. Though seemingly being “inevitable” throughout the race, Romney has faced a daunting, yet famil-iar challenge: the fact that, deep inside the

Republican base, he just isn’t liked.Thus the race to discover a candidate

who was not Mitt Romney commenced. Almost every candidate (with the excep-tion of John Huntsman and Ron Paul, who are both considered unelectable, for completely opposite reasons) has had their chance at the top of the polls and all of them, with the exception of Romney, have revealed a fatal flaw about themselves in the process, whether it be Bachmann and Perry’s gaffes, or Cain and Gingrich’s his-tory.

The key issue is ideology, specifically a strongly conservative one, which many feel Romney lacks, due to his history as a centrist and moderate who courted Demo-crats while a Governor of Massachusetts. The Republican base views their candi-dates based not on the ideas they propose but the beliefs they prescribe to - whether economic, social, or religious. They look back to Ronald Reagan with nostalgia not because of his actual record in office but because of his strong ideology, with em-phasis on small government and lower taxes. What many Republicans are look-ing for is not a practical leader who might effect some change, but rather a conser-vative icon-in-the-making that George W. Bush proved not to be. Romney doesn’t fit because he’s an off-putting combination

of bland and i d e o l o g i c a l l y fluid; he’s been attacked many times for chang-ing his opinions 180 degrees.

Whoever the winner of the primaries will turn out to be, the Republican

base will force themselves to be happy with, though, because as much as they dislike Mitt Romney, they have a visceral hate for Barack Obama - and chances are, Republican voters will have to pocket their conservative idealism for the time being, because the other flavors of candidate they’ve tried have all proven to be unsa-vory.

by Ryan Lee

GOP Wheel of Fortune

The Republican base views their candidates based not on the ideas they propose but the beliefs they prescribe

to - whether economic, social, or religious.

A look at the rise and fall of Republican Candidates

THE CHARIOT

MAY 20126

2012 Elections Candidate PositionsBARACKOBAMA

NEWTGINGRICH

TITLE President of the United States Former Speaker of the House

ECONOMIC POLICY

EDUCATION

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

HEALTHCARE

CURRENTSTATUS

Restrict Fed’s power to set interest rates; make work training a condition of unem-ployment insurance; make Bush tax cuts permanent; reduce corporate taxes and eliminate capital gains & inheritance taxes; supports move toward optional flat tax of 15%;

Repeal the Obama’s health care bill, allow health insurance to be sold across state lines, provide generous tax credit or a de-duction for the cost of health insurance

Proposed the Buffet Rule, apply minimum effective tax rate of 30% on millionaires; passed American Recovery and Reinvest-ment Act of 2009 (stimulus package) and proposed American Jobs Act

Supports Defense of Marriage Act. Favors an amendment to the Constitution if law is overturned.

Publicly stated he believes same-sex mar-riage should be legal; supported court ruling that Prop. 8 was unconstitutional, backs repeal of Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman

Dramatically shrink Department of Education, supports school vouchers that would give students money to pick their own schools

CAMPAIGNSUSPENDED

June 5 June 26 Aug. 27 - 30 Sept. 3-6Looking Ahead

California PrimaryMontana Primary

New Jersey PrimaryNew Mexico Primary

South Dakota Primary

Utah Primary Republican National Convention

Democratic National Convention

Passed health care bill that will require most individuals to obtain health insur-ance or pay a penalty (also known as the individual mandate)

Created Race to the Top (reward states for reaching certain educational standards), reformed No Child Left Behind

Incumbent president

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

MAY 2012 7

2012 Elections Candidate PositionsRON

PAULRICK

SANTORUMMITT

ROMNEYUS Representative from Texas Former governor of Massachusetts Former Senator of Pennsylvania

Supports No Child Left Behind, is critical of teachers unions

Return to the gold standard, eliminate the Federal Reserve, let gold and silver be used as form of currency, eliminate income tax and IRS, deep cuts to welfare

Reduce government regulation, increase trade deals to spur growth, balance budget, supports “cut, cap, and balance”, repeal Dodd-Frank; cut corporate taxes; eliminate capital gains & inheritance taxes

Believes should be left to states, supports federal law allowing one state to refuse to recognize the same-sex marriages of another state

Eliminate Department of Education and let states handle education

Eliminate corporate tax rate for manufac-turers, drill for more oil and gas, and slash regulations

Signed pledge to support constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage

Signed pledge to support constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage

Supports school vouchers that would give students money to pick their own schools

Repeal the Obama’s health care bill, favors letting people deduct full cost of their health coverage and care from taxes

Repeal Obama’s health care bill modeled after Massachusetts universal health care bill; issue waivers to all 50 states allowing them to opt out of the federal plan on first day in office

Suspend Obama’s health care bill, sup-ported Bush administration’s prescription drug program for the elderly

Frontrunner, expected Republican nomi-nee

Has won 119 delegates as of May 25 CAMPAIGNSUSPENDED

Nov. 6

Election Day

Jan. 20

Inauguration Day

Oct. 3

First Presidential Debate at University of Denver

Oct. 22

Final Presidential Debate at Lynn University

THE CHARIOT

MAY 20128

With the recent Iowa caucus, voters and candidates alike are anticipating a bloody bat-

tle of words from the nominated GOP candidate. Issues from health care to im-migration reform to a potential war with a slowly proliferating nuclear Iran will to be covered. But Obama faces a problem that will prove to be much tougher to ar-gue against than the elected GOP candi-date: the economy.

Even as the unemployment rate steadily sways up and down the 9% line, the unwavering line of American disap-proval is imminent as one of the key problems he will be facing this election. The economy, Obamacare, bailouts, and lowered taxes will all be cards the nomi-nated GOP candidate will have in hand. Obama also faces a House currently controlled by the opposing party. Keep in mind, however, that previous incum-

bents such as Reagan and Clinton did not have a problem with opposing Con-gress majorities in previous elections.

However, although Obama will have some difficulty with the issues facing his campaign, the GOP candidates have some problems of their own to face. The dropout of candidates Pawlen-ty, Cain and recently Bachmann have shown how little “faith” candidates have in their own campaign. The party knows well and clear that to achieve their goal, which many candidates consider as get-ting Obama out of office, they need to elect a candidate that will have a good chance against him. Right now, that can-didate seems to be the inconsistent, cut-throat, well-spoken but dull orator Mitt Romney. This moderate republican who currently believes in pro-choice, pro-gun control, and similar health-care reform policies seems to pose no drastic changes

to the current administration. So when it all comes down to it, America would be choosing between two fairly similar candidates, except for the fact that one is black and one is Mormon. Keep in mind, however, that 96% of African-Americans polled approval of Obama among voters. In retrospect, while the factors in the election are not as simple as this, such numbers should definitely hold some ground.

Taking into account these factors, it is apparent that while America may have some setbacks right now, it may not be time just yet for a Republican landslide victory. With Obama’s approval rating steadily rising and the current progress of the GOP candidates, the odds may be turning in his favor. Obama might just live up to his proclamation of being the fourth best president, at least in incum-bent runs.

Wayland FongContributing Writer

Obama 2012: Time for change?

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

MAY 2012 9

The United States military is the strongest in the world. According to the United States Office of Un-

dersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, the US Armed Forces fields approximately 1,477,895 ac-tive personnel, making it second only to China in manpower. For decades, the US military has maintained a presence all over the globe, with large troop contingents in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, South Korea and Japan. However, while the United States may have good intentions in maintaining global security and continuing its war against terrorism, it is in the United States’ best interest to reduce its global military presence.

The sad truth is that the United States is in an economic slump. The U.S. is fac-ing its worst economic recession since the Great Depression in the 1930s. ABC News stated that the total U.S. federal debt reached $15 trillion dollars on Novem-ber 16, 2011. This massive debt is largely owed to the government’s enormous an-nual budget shortfall. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal government’s budget shortfall for the fis-cal year 2011 was $1.3 trillion. In addition to massive debt, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that the unemployment rate is at a high 8.6 percent. For the rea-

sons above, the U.S. is not in a position to actively finance global troop presence.

The current U.S. defense budget cur-rently represents a significant portion of the United States debt. According to the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense, the total defense budget is a whopping $548.9 billion, which constitutes 4.7 per-cent of the gross domestic product. The United States federal government allocates more money to the Department of De-fense than any other federal department or program.

In 2011 alone, $113 billion was spent on US troop presence in Afghanistan and $46 billion was spent on US troop presence in Iraq. In total, the US military has spent over a trillion dollars in its wars in Afghan-istan and Iraq. In fact, the United States’ Afghanistan war fund totals greater than the combined projected budget short-fall. According to the National Priorities Project, state governments are projected in 2012 to have a combined shortfall of $102.9 billion while spending $122 billion on the War in Afghanistan in 2011. If the United States military were to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan, the federal gov-ernment could pay off the debt of every state in the United States.

The money currently being used on US troop presence in Afghanistan can be put into better use. For example, the United States has fallen in world educa-tion rankings. According to a report pub-lished by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in December 2010, America fell in inter-national education rankings, based on the PISA exam, to “average”. The impact of improving public spending would be tre-

mendous. If the United States boosted its average PISA scores by 25 points over the next 20 years, there could be a gain of ap-proximately $41 trillion in the US economy over the lifetime of the generation born in 2010, according to a recent OECD study by Stanford. By improving the quality of American education, both the U.S. econ-omy and U.S. students will benefit greatly.

Some may argue that the United States has a moral commitment in waging the global war on terrorism. On September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States killed over 3,000 innocent lives. However, as the United States and its allies continue their war on terror, global terrorism has in-creased. Islamic terrorism in countries ex-cluding Afghanistan, Israel, and Iraq, rose from around 50 incidents in the month of January 2004 to over 200 in April 2008, according to the American Security Proj-ect. All incidents of Islamic terrorism in-creased six fold between January 2004 and April 2008. With global terrorism continu-ing to increase across the world, the U.S. government should withdraw its troops in combat zones likes Afghanistan.

Reducing US military presence across the globe has been subject to much de-bate. The United States could benefit greatly from money being invested into other areas such as education; improving education could make the United States more prosperous than ever. Unfortunately, this may never be realized, especially with the massive Department of Defense bud-get and substantial spending for the War in Afghanistan. The United States gov-ernment should realize that pulling out its troops stationed overseas will likely open up a path for renewed prosperity.

Eric NohContributing Writer

Time for US to leave

THE CHARIOT

MAY 201210

At first glance, the Occupy cru-sade seems impressive, even noble. A physical stand against the corruption within our po-

litical and economic systems sounds like a great way to make the demands of the populace known, right? Wrong.

Just what does the Occupy movement lack? The answer is two-fold. Without strong leadership or any set demands, the campaign is unable to make any signifi-cant progress. In November, the Financial Times itself noted that “the lack of unified goals means no influence on the political mainstream,” while it became clear dur-ing the G-20 summit in Cannes that banks would be sure to block the idea of a “Rob-in Hood tax” from becoming a reality.

The movement has Adbusters to look to for guidance, but the advice given is less than helpful. Adbusters stated to its followers that it was “now time to amp up the…deviant pranks, subversive per-formances, playful détournements of all kinds.” This kind of wisdom is hardly practical for those who do not wish to be compared to a group of rowdy teenagers who lack the ability to plan for the future or to take decisive, logical action.

The movement holds a strong com-mitment to the system of participatory democracy, which is an unrealistic if not extremely inconvenient and inefficient system of government. Experts note that a consensus based democracy cannot work with more than a couple hundred people simply because it requires exces-sive amounts of monitoring to prevent free riding and only works well with like-minded individuals. Plus, there is a higher chance of groupthink with such a practice because there exists a heavy pressure to conform in order to maintain a consensus.

Furthermore, these General Assem-blies, as they are called, meeting at seven in the evening at every Occupy site, carry out their decisions through a consensus model of direct democracy, relying heavily on the

advanced technique of the hand signal. In order to exercise proper progressive be-havior, all speakers must move forward or backward in line based upon their demo-graphic. Women and minorities may speak first, whereas the white male will usually speak last. All of this is implemented in or-der to ensure complete fairness, of course. In the tradition of direct democracy, the movement is leaderless. Absolutely no-body should have authority, a practice that Douglas Rushkoff has stated is the main reason for the continuing lack of a true leader, direction, goals or an endpoint within the protest. He also stated that the absence of these refining qualities is what constrains the Occupy Movement to the internet and solely that.

Various subgroups of the Occupy Movement, such as Occupy Homes, only work to increase the negative appearance of the protest, through unrealistic and poorly organized plans to occupy fore-closed homes, disrupt bank auctions and to forcibly block evictions.

In fairness, Occupy Wall Street does have some hints of civilized behavior. A library was established under a large tent, with reading materials obtained through the interlibrary loan system. However, in true Occupy Wall Street fashion, all of these works, none of which were the prop-erty of Occupy Wall Street, were com-pletely destroyed during one of the many struggles that ensued within the camp.

In addition to being a destructive force when it comes to literature, the Occupy protestors have set up what officials deem a “rowdy fire hazard”, with laptops and other electronic devices powered with gas generators, an extremely unsafe practice that could result in very disastrous conse-quences, not only for the camps but for the innocent around the sites.

Bear in mind that Zuccotti Park, where the protests were first held, is not, and I repeat not, a public park. This facility is privately owned by Brookfield Office

Properties, who were extremely lenient in allowing the movement to take place ini-tially. Who can begrudge a business if it wishes to take the time to clean the land that it owns? When Brookfield expressed a desire to clear and clean the park, since the levels of sanitation had reached such a low point that a health hazard was immi-nent, the protestors took to a personal af-front and decided that they would prepare for violence, because violence is definitely preferable than having a park restored to habitable levels of sanitation.

What’s more, when the cleaning turned out to be postponed, the protestors, going off of the excuse that they were already armed for a clash, decided it was necessary to fight the police forces outside of New York’s City Hall instead. This unpremedi-tated display of rioting was uncalled for and senseless, much like the entirety of the movement itself.

When the park was finally cleared, the

No Occupation by Chloe Blanchard

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

MAY 2012 11

Occupy media team issued a message, stat-ing, “You can’t evict an idea whose time has come.” What idea? The occupation of a privately owned park for a temporary amount of time in order to achieve noth-ing but a waste of government time and money, and to create various instances of unwarranted and detrimental violence? Definitely a great idea.

Crime is another issue that has risen to the top of debate. As of October, there had been multiple reported incidents of assault, drug dealing and use, and sexual assault. The lawlessness present at demon-strations is a result of failed de-escalation techniques, such as “talking down” or the advanced method of blocking punches with one’s body. Those who become too rowdy are ushered out, but almost always return. The risks for women at these sites is exponential at night, and thanks to the Occupy rule of keeping quiet until an of-fender has repeated actions at least three

times, the prevalence of violence, espe-cially sexual harassment, is unbounded. In November, a man broke the leg of an EMT. He was later found to have numer-ous warrants out for his arrest at the time, representing the movement wonderfully. When asked about response measures, all the movement had to say was, “We are re-doubling our efforts to raise more aware-ness about sexual violence. This includes taking new preventative measures such as encouraging healthy relationship dynam-ics.” Sounds like a plan almost as good as the initial idea to Occupy.

In Oakland, protestors have destroyed City Hall and the local YMCA. What rea-sons have they for harming a city building and the local gymnasium? How will these demonstrators explain to their kids the sig-nificance of their destroying the place their kids go to play sports and have fun? The police forces have been stretched to their limits because of these pointless acts, and

numerous calls to 911 were unanswered as a result of that night, meaning many per-sons who needed help did not receive it as they should have, thanks, once again, to the Occupy movement.

In short, the Occupy movement lacks organization and leadership, as well as the establishment of any end goals or regard for others within society. Taking a stance against the police by hurling plastic bags filled with human feces is a clear indicator of the level of maturity and intelligence that exists within the movement. Occupy Wall Street started off with a good idea and a great cause, but it is evident that the way in which the movement was carried out resulted in nothing more than a unhelp-ful resistance that caused much strain on the government and the rest of the nation as well. The Occupiers are nothing more than an infestation, and it is high time that they cease their fruitless actions and take the initiative to actually pursue a job.

No Occupation by Chloe Blanchard

THE CHARIOT

MAY 201212

On December 19, 2011, the North Korean gov-ernment announced to

the world that Kim Jong-il, the absolute dictator of North Korea for 14 years, died of a heart attack while traveling by train. Outside of North Korea, he will not be re-membered well. Rather, he will be remembered for running his coun-try’s economy into the ground, en-acting a nuclear policy that placed the entire world on edge and, above all, continuing a massive personal-ity cult inside North Korea.

Stemming partly from unrealistic expectations for his country, partly from North Korea’s legacy of isolationism, and partly from his own stubbornness, Kim Jong-il used two key concepts to guide his country’s economic policies: juche and songun. Juche, introduced by Kim Jong-il’s father, Kim Il-sung, translates to “self-reliance.” The policy of juche attempts to make North Korea entirely self-sufficient, without any help from outside forces, even to provide technological advances or to purchase goods. In theory, this independence from the rest of the world would strengthen North Korea. In reality, it has destroyed its economy, and the few goods that it does produce is usually laughable in quality. Songun, which translates to “military-first,” is a policy which places top political and economic priority on its military. Though this has led to the fourth largest standing army in the world, it has also created large neglect for its citizens. These two policies combined have created a living hell on Earth for the North Koreans, with widespread starvation. Even the farmers are forced to grow cash crops instead of food for themselves and their peers.

While in the past Kim could only oppress the citizens within his borders, North Korea now

possesses the capability to destroy whole cities with the press of a button. On October 9, 2006, North Korea successfully conducted a nuclear test. Due to North Korea’s constant denouncements of the Western world, the world watched Kim Jong-il’s trigger-happy finger with a careful eye. Since then, Kim Jong-il has taken advantage of his country’s nuclear capabilities by threatening nuclear war to achieve various goals. One example of such nuclear leverage took place on July 24, 2010. When North Korea sunk a South Korean warship, they threatened to use their nuclear capabilities. The U.S and South Korea were forced to abstain, and North Korea remained unpunished, fearing retaliation.

The most infamous aspect of Kim Jong-il’s leadership is the personality cult, where everyone, young or old, regardless of class, is either brainwashed or forced under threat of death to worship Kim Jong-il, and his son, Kim Jong-un, as gods. Religion is outlawed in this society, for the only gods they need are displayed on huge posters posted everywhere. It is required to say grace to these tyrants. To point out any flaw in these men is enough cause to be sent to a concentration camp. One man was sent to a concentration camp for saying that Kim Jong-un had a lump on his neck.

As an absolute dictator, Kim Jong-il had direct control and abso-lute knowledge of everything that happened in his country. He alone was responsible for his country’s economic collapse and isolationism from the world, his people’s star-vation, and North Korea’s many crimes against humanity. He was a terrible person that caused the most suffering to the most people in recent memory. Except for those brainwashed by the system he ruled over, he will not be missed.

Joseph NicollsContributing Writer

Goodbye, Dear Leader