China covid protest affecting more than China, US stock market as well

    The public in China is taking to the streets to protest against lockdowns due to Covid restrictions in China. People of China are frustrated with the lockdown policy, the protest started online and then marched to government buildings, protesting, and shouting, “end lockdowns” causing widespread civil disobedience. Protest is now evidenced all over the country in 79 Universities in 15 different provinces.

In November 2022, there was a recent deadly protest in Urumqi, Xinjiang Province where a resident of China was calling for the lifting of lockdown that confined them in their homes for more than three months with lacking necessary supplies. The people of China are very angry with the COVID restriction, and they are protesting for democracy and human rights and even asking for the resignation of Chinese President Xi Jinping and his zero-COVID policy. China's economy is gone down as a result of the lockdown increasing unemployment. There are also worries about how large these protests are becoming and that they might turn south similar to what happened in Tiananmen square 1989, but what everyone knows for sure is that this protest is just the beginning of what Chinese citizens are willing to do for a change in how life is.

China's Protest has had a negative impact on the Chinese economy and has drastically affected the world stock market, especially it has a negative impact on shares of companies that rely on China for production. Apple's production of phones reduced significantly having a negative impact on Apple's stock price and today December 11 the Apple stock price decreased to $142 per share compared to a high of $182 per share in 2021. Supply chain issue is faced all over the globe, increasing delivery time from China. Some companies are evaluating moving their production facilities to other countries, such as Apple shifted some of its manufacturing to India. We can see companies being less reliant on China causing China to have an even more serious problem with unemployment rates increasing in the years coming.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/09/business/hong-kong-economy-protests-business/index.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/26/world/asia/china-protests-covid.html

https://www.axios.com/2022/11/28/china-protests-zero-covid-apple

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/29/investing/premarket-stocks-trading/index.html

Tensions Rise Over Exchange Involving Brittney Griner's Release

On December 8th, WNBA star Brittney Griner was released from Russia, and finally touched American soil the next day in San Antonio, Texas, after being detained for 294 days. And while the release of American citizens has normally been a moment of bipartisan celebration, the decision to bring her home has been met with a lot of criticism.

Brittney Griner was originally detained in February, when she was arrested on drug smuggling charges at an airport in the Moscow region, with her appeal of her prison sentence in October being rejected. She was detained just a week before Russia launched a full-scale military attack against Ukraine, souring the relations with America, making it very difficult to negotiate for her release. Eventually, The United States and Russia agreed to a one-for-one prisoner exchange, where Brittney Griner would be returned home in exchange for releasing Viktor Bout. 

Much of the controversy lies in the agreement to release Victor Bout, "The Merchant of Death." Bout, a former Soviet military translator turned international arms dealer, had been imprisoned for more than a decade after he was lured to Thailand in a Drug Enforcement Administration sting operation that spanned three continents. Bout helped fuel civil wars across the world by supplying more sophisticated weapons, sometimes to both sides of the bloody conflicts. "If I didn't do it, someone else would," Bout told the New Yorker. Michael Braun, the former chief of operations for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, told "60 Minutes" in 2010 that "Viktor Bout, in my eyes, is one of the most dangerous men on the face of the Earth." The reputation of Bout has led many to question whether the trade to bring Griner home was ethical, given the potential destruction Bout could cause once in Russian hands.

Additionally, Republicans are angered by the release of Griner, as the Biden administration was unable to secure Paul Whelan, a Marine turned corporate security executive who was convicted of espionage and is serving a 16-year sentence in a Russian prison. Biden said his administration has “not forgotten about Paul Whelan,” and promised to “keep negotiating in good faith for his release.”

Regardless, Republicans claim favoritism, with Tucker Carlson calling out the decision on Fox News. “Whelan is a Trump voter, and he made the mistake of saying so on social media,” Mr. Carlson said in his monologue. “He’s paying the price now. Brittney Griner is not. She has very different politics. Brittney Griner despises the United States.” 

This disapproval of the decision seems to have influenced a rise of homophobia and racism towards Griner and the left as whole. Ms. Gilbert, an expert on prisoner exchanges, received a spike in emails — many of them racist and homophobic — questioning why Ms. Griner should be released at all.

Ultimately, regardless of whether the decision to release Brittney Griner was good or not, the polarization between political parties and reinforced homophobia and racism is not a great response from any perspective, and is not a proper one for the successfully bringing an American citizen home.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/09/us/politics/griner-blowback.html

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/11/politics/griner-whelan-american-detainees-carstens-cnntv/index.html

https://www.cbssports.com/wnba/news/brittney-griner-situation-explained-wnba-all-star-released-from-russian-custody-after-prisoner-swap/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/viktor-bout-russia-arms-dealer-merchant-of-death-brittney-griner/

House Plans To Reveal Information on the January 6th Insurrection on December 21st

 The January 6th House Committee has seemingly concluded the investigation and plans to release information surrounding the insurrection on December 21st. The committee’s representative, Bennie Thompson, a Democrat representing the second congressional district of Mississippi, said in a statement that he believes the committee will make criminal referrals, and is even considering one for former President Donald Trump and his close allies.

The report will most probably include ideas for future legislation in an effort to prevent the riots from happening again, although these bills may have to go through strenuous committee, and the document is said to be almost 8 pages long, according to Thompson. It is important to note that referrals from committees serve nearly no legal weight, but can serve as advocates for change in legislation or agenda. However, that being said, most of the members in the committee believe a criminal referral is necessary to finalize their work.

According to the committee, Trump “summoned” people to the White House after refusing to accept election results, claiming the election was “stolen” and “rigged”. Facebook groups were formed rallying for Trump, who on the day of the 6th said "We will never give up. We will never concede."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/jan-6-committee-plans-issue-criminal-referrals-part-final-report-rcna60541

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/06/politics/january-6-committee-criminal-referrals/index.html

Same-Sex Marriage Bill Passes Both Chambers of Congress With Surprising Bipartisan Support

Approaching an uncertain future of increasing political polarization, society has to hold onto and cherish the little victories that come along the way. It may not seem like much, but these small political moments of positivity provide optimism for better days ahead. The recent updates regarding the Respect for Marriage Act is one of those glimmers of hope, and can perhaps be a sign of a changing tide against polarization.

The Respect for Marriage Act is a bill that if passed would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and require the federal government to recognize same-sex and interracial marriages. And while these are already protected by the 2015 Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges, which found that same-sex marriage is constitutionally protected, this bill acts as a fail safe, in case the ruling is overturned sometime in the future. 

This bill was passed in the Senate on November 29th, with a final vote of 61-36, after breaking a filibuster earlier in the month, and was passed in the House of Representatives, with a final vote of 268-169, with one member voting present.

While the news of a beneficial bill heading on its way to President Biden is already good, what makes it great is the surprising amount of bipartisan support in both Chambers of Congress. 39 House Republicans voted for the bill, as well as 12 Republican Senators. Many politicians and reporters are celebrating the support for the bill, with President Biden himself hailing it as a “bipartisan achievement.” 

But what does this mean for the future? Was this an anomaly on the overall path of worsening political polarization? Or is this a turning point in the US government, where the pattern of polarization will begin to change for the better? Only time will tell, but if bipartisan support is present in a bill that supports same-sex marriage, a rather heated topic, which only a decade ago was regarded by members of both parties as divisive and risky terrain, things for once might be changing for the better. The bill now heads to President Biden to be signed into law.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/29/us/politics/same-sex-marriage-bill-senate.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/08/us/politics/same-sex-marriage-congress.html

https://www.npr.org/2022/12/08/1140808263/what-does-the-respect-for-marriage-act-do-the-answer-will-vary-by-state

As Railroad Workers Threaten to Halt US Economy, Biden Forced to Make Tough Decisions

Image Credits: Brandon Bell/Getty Images

On December 2nd, President Biden signed legislation that forced railroad workers to agree to an employment contract that only granted workers 1 day of paid sick leave. 

Railroad workers, who, under current contracts, have no paid sick leave, felt like they were being exploited to prop up the United States economy and Railroad Industry during the pandemic. With workers falling ill and dying to COVID-19, many employees viewed the lack of paid sick leave as a gross mistreatment. 

Most railroad workers, including engineers and conductors, are represented by 12 unions. Over the past three years, negotiations between these unions and railroad companies have proved ineffective, and union workers threatened to strike on December 9th, 2022 if no agreement was reached. Strikes would’ve halted the industry’s functions and “30% of the nation’s freight shipments” that railroads account for (Chris Isidore, CNN Business) . 

Faced with the possibility of massive supply chain delays, Biden urged Congress to pass a bill that forced union workers to agree to a contract set by Congress. Passed in 1926, the Railway Labor Act grants Congress the power to force contracts upon railroad workers and stop strikes. Initially, the House of Representatives passed a law that would grant union workers a week’s worth of paid sick leave; however, the Senate only gained 52 votes in support of the bill that the House passed—8 votes short to overcome the filibuster. 

Ultimately, the House and Senate passed a bill that granted workers only 1 extra day of paid sick leave—a far stretch from the 7 days of paid sick leave that unions demanded. Although this Congress-enforced contract also included an increase in pay, 4 of the labor unions refused to agree to this 1-day-paid-sick-leave contract during the earlier negotiations stages. 

President Biden, a self-proclaimed “proud pro-labor President,” signed this bill on December 2nd, forcing railroad workers to accept only 1 day of paid sick leave. 

Although Biden had a tight timeline and few options to win over senatorial support for a more pro-worker bill, the railroad workers that supported Biden are undoubtedly disappointed. 

Yet, the blame shouldn’t fall entirely on Biden. After all, the Senate’s minority party (most of the initial contract’s opposition was from Republicans) wielded the filibuster to deny underappreciated workers of 6 extra sick days, highlighting the undemocratic nature of the filibuster.

Sources: https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/02/business/railway-labor-act-freight-railroad-strike/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/11/28/rail-strike-biden-congress/

Tensions in Iran rise as Student Day Approaches and Iranian Figures Denounce the Regime

Student Day in Iran signifies the anniversary of the murder of three students at the University of Tehran on December 7th, 1953 by Iranian police under the regime of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (commonly known as Mohammad Reza Shah). The sentiment of Student Day is exceedingly relevant amidst the current protest in Iran against the abuses of the Islamic regime and police force. 

Former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami issued a statement to the current regime in anticipation of increased protest action around Student Day. “I advise the officials to appreciate this presence and instead of dealing with it inappropriately, take a softer approach and listen to them and with their help, recognize the wrong aspects of governance before it is too late for them to move towards good governance,” said Khatami, regarding the government’s handling of the protests. Since the escalation of protests following the death of Mahsa Amini (the 22 year old Kurdish Iranian woman who died in police custody after violating hijab laws), at least 448 protesters have been killed in the uproar according to the Iran Human Rights organization.

Former Pres. Mohammad Khatami

Khatami emphasized in his address that the essence of freedom and security are not mutually exclusive stating “Just as freedom is an urgent need and an important demand, security is also important for the country.” Khatami’s support is just what the Iranian people need to refuel their fight and stand their ground against the regime. Khatami reprimanded the Mohammad Khatami government for not paying attention to or valuing the rightful demands of the people. Khatami faulted Iran’s government a few weeks ago when he expressed via Twitter that the “bitter events” in Iran were being caused by the “faulty and incorrect mechanism and method of governance.” Khatami also called the phrase “Zan (woman), Zendegi (life), Azadi (freedom),” a beautiful message “that shows the movement towards a better future,” emphasizing that fighting hate with hate is ineffective and that focusing on uplifting the Iranian people will always have more value than attempting to tear the government down. 

Similarly to Khatami, Iranian Summi cleric Molavi Abdolhamid Ismaeelzahi urged Iran’s judiciary to investigate and prosecute individuals guilty of abusing women in prison. CNN recently released an investigation revealing the abuse endured by female prisoners in Iran’s detention facilities, giving survivors and eyewitnesses who fled the country a platform to speak about the sexual abuse they suffered. Ismaeelzahi added that “news about the sexual assault of female prisoners with the intention of humiliating, suppressing and forcing them for confessions have been reported in the media, and some prisoners’ accounts confirm this,” and concluded his statement saying “It is necessary for the judiciary to prosecute these people and punish them severely.”

Protests in Iran following the death of Mahsa Amini

(pictured signs read Zan (Woman) Zendegi (Life) Azadi (Freedom))

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/07/middleeast/iran-protests-khatami-former-president-intl

After Months of Protest by the Iranian People, Reports Suggest the Morality Police Has Been Abolished

 

On September 16th, 2022, 22-year-old Mahsa Amini was detained and killed for not following the laws put in place by the theocratic Iranian government, stirring a multitude of protests. However, reports suggest that after three months of brutal protest, and the political debate surrounding the national team singing the anthem during the World Cup, the morality police, in charge of the enforcing strict laws following the religion of Islam, including strict dress codes for women, has seemingly been abolished. On Saturday, December 3rd, Attorney General Mohammad Javad Montazeri, a senior Iranian official, told a national news outlet that Iran had parted ways with the morality police, coming with much joy to the Iranian people. 

The protests,  with the coined phrase “women, life, freedom” has also come with compromise; while officials may also consider changing hijab laws, a momentous step in the eyes of the protestors, it is also very probable that the government may set other precedents in other areas of life. While 99.5% of Iran is Muslim, many in the country do not stand with the theocratic government, that embrace its name of the “Islamic Republic of Iran”.

While the protests started with the killing of Amini, tensions in Iran have been persistent. According to the BBC, there has been unrest over poverty and unemployment for decades in Iran, dating back to the Iranian Revolution in 1979. In 2006, the morality police was put in place by the government, and tensions have steadily risen.

It is clear that while the morality police may have been disbanded by the government, it is very possible that the Iranian people may have to struggle for human rights, and this may just be the tip of the iceberg. It is highly probable that the Iranian government, valuing strong authority, may continue to put other laws in place infringing freedoms Westerners may see as unalienable. While the continuous Iranian protests may have succeeded this time, it is very likely that more may follow in the coming months and/or years.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-63850656

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/04/world/middleeast/iran-morality-police.html

Georgia's Senate Race Could Have Significant Ramifications for Democratic Legislation in the Senate

 

Democrat Raphael Warnock (Left) & Republican Herschel Walker (Right)

According to Georgia’s Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, 1.85 million people in Georgia have already voted early in the Georgia runoff election for the United States Senate. 

To win Georgia’s senatorial seat in Congress, candidates must win 50% of the vote in the general election. After both Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock and Republican Herschel Walker fell short of this 50% requirement in November, the state initiated its runoff process between the two candidates. 

Currently, the record-breaking voter turnout has favored Warnock, who has captured 52% of early votes. If Walker, a candidate endorsed by former President Donald Trump, loses, his campaign will lengthen Trump’s list of failed endorsements, serving as an indication for Republican leaders to distance themselves from the former President and his efforts for the Republican presidential nomination. 

Similar to the 2020 election, Democrats have won 50 seats in the Senate; however, two Democratic Senators, Joe Manchin (WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (AZ) have demonstrated that they are willing to dissent against the Democratic party’s Senate leadership. Manchin, a Democrat from a particularly Republican state, touts himself as a “conservative Democrat,” a stance that is necessary for him to maintain support in the heavily Republican West Virginia. Similarly, Sinema is a centrist-Democrat that will only support tax reforms benefiting Arizona’s economic growth. Manchin refused to vote for Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act until the program’s proposed budget was significantly reduced, and Sinema opposed a clause in the Inflation Reduction Act that closed tax loopholes for hedge fund managers, law firm partners, etc. 

If Raphael Warnock wins re-election in Georgia, Senate Democrats will have a much easier time passing bills. A 51-49 split in favor of the Democrats will reduce Manchin and Sinema’s ability to halt Democratic bills and grant Democrats majority control in all Senate committees, allowing Democrats to form more favorable reports for Democrat-backed legislation and bring more bills to the Senate’s voting floor. 

The nation’s founders intended the Senate to be safeguard against majority tyranny of larger states. Slim leads in party control give a small handful of Senators, such as Manchin and Sinema, massive leverage to pass legislation that benefits their constituents. Although this may have been the process of bargaining and compromise that the founders wanted, it contributes to policy gridlock. With Republicans winning the House this election cycle, the Democrats will already have a difficult time passing legislation. Warnock’s victory would reduce the chances for gridlock by shrinking the Democrats’ hurdles in the Senate. 

Sources: 

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3758843-five-reasons-why-the-georgia-senate-runoff-matters/

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/02/georgia-senate-runoff-early-voting-00071944

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/31/joe-manchin-hails-deal-inflation-reduction-act

Democratic Committee Approves Bidens Plan to Re-order the First Democratic Primaries.

        

                                              (Jaime Harrison, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, at the group’s meeting on Friday.)

 

When it comes to the presidential nomination race it has been a standing tradition for the first four primaries and caucuses to be Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina. Yet this may not be the case for the 2024 election.

            Last Friday, a proposed order of democratic primaries was proposed and accepted by a key party panel within the DNC. The proposed order had “South Carolina on Feb. 3, followed by New Hampshire and Nevada on Feb. 6, Georgia on Feb. 13 and then Michigan on Feb. 27.” Additionally, Iowa was set to be significantly later with the rest of the pack. 

The plan is supposed to put “battleground states” earlier in the election and to better represent the diversity of the democratic vote. In an election there are really only about 8 “battleground” states with the rest swinging completely towards one side. Thus, by placing Michigan and Georgia earlier in the primary order those states are given more emphasis in the overall race. 

Yet the main reason for the proposed change is to better represent the diversity of the democratic vote. South Carolina, a state in which Black voters were more than half of the democratic vote, was proposed to go first. Moreover, Nevada, a state with a sizable Latino democratic vote was moved up as well. On the other hand, the primarily White Iowa was sent back with the rest of the pack. 

“We rely on these voters in elections but have not recognized their importance in our nominating calendar. It is time to stop taking these votes for granted, and time to give them a louder and earlier voice in the process,” wrote President Biden in a letter to the committee. 

In the 2020 race, Biden struggled in both the Iowa and New Hampshire races, only receiving a meager 15.8% and 8.4% of the vote respectively. Thus, Biden is the main facilitator and strong supporter of the plan as it would give him a strong start in the nomination process and allow him to not have to rely on super Tuesday. 

Yet, as of December 2nd, Biden has not announced his campaign for re-election. Whether Biden decides to run again or not, the proposed plan would greatly help any candidate get a strong start in the beginning of the race.

Another proposed part of the plan is the removal of caucuses. In recent years, caucuses are becoming less and less popular. Nevada has moved over to having a primary, and Iowa, a state who has a caucus, is no longer an important race according to the proposed plan.

Whether the proposed plan will ever see the light of day still remains to be seen. A main preventing factor is New Hampshire. New Hampshire has a state law that gives its secretary of state the power to move up the date of the primary to protect its first-in-the-nation status. Additionally, another criticism is that no state situated in the Central or Mountain time zone is represented in the opening primaries.

The plan now faces full DNC approval in early February of next year. Whether the plan, or a modified version of it, is approved or not, the 2024 democratic nomination race will depend greatly on the first primaries. 

Sources:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/us/politics/michigan-democratic-presidential-primary.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/us/politics/democrats-south-carolina-primary-2024.html

https://www.npr.org/2022/12/01/1140193037/president-biden-calls-for-a-big-shakeup-in-democrats-presidential-nominating-cal

Inflations impact on the holiday season

 The pandemic catalyzed inflation in the United States, creating rifts in the supply chain while forcing the American government to pump stimuli into the economy. Services have become increasingly more expensive, as workers have been reluctant to return to pre-covid work. Factory closures have impacted food prices, while the Russian invasion of Ukraine has damaged gas and energy production, subsequently causing those prices to skyrocket. The federal reserve has been trying to raise interest rates to counteract the rampant inflation, but they have had little success. Inflation has leaked further into the American economy than just physical goods and services, threatening areas ranging from dental care to hotel rates. The Fed continues the strategy of increasing borrowing costs to slow spending, and then rein in prices, but the US economy remains at a 7.7% inflation rate*. This year, inflation has been at its highest level since the early 1980s, raising the price of goods at a rate that is significantly more than the growth of American wages.       

US inflation over last 100 years

For retailers, the fourth quarter is always the biggest as the holiday season approaches. Despite inflation, retailers can look forward to seeing some of their biggest earnings yet this year. Black Friday experienced a record-high 196.7 million people rushing back to stores to catch the best deals, while Amazon's online sales surged on Cyber Monday. Eric Swanson, an economics professor at the University of California, Irvine stated, “most people in America spend pretty much their whole budget anyway… So the money is going to get spent, it’s just a question of what it’s going to get spent on.” This is good news for big corporations, as though the average American is becoming significantly poorer relative to the costs around them, the large monopolies will continue to capitalize on their gains this holiday season. The healthcare and retail industries have not only been virtually unaffected but they actually have seen some of their largest profits ever this year. 

Black Friday at Walmart

But, most importantly, inflation is affecting how much the average American will have to spend during these holidays. Americans saw Thanksgiving feasts cost 20% more than last year, and 40% more than in 2020. The average box of stuffing went up 69%, pie crust went up 26%, and dinner rolls became 22% more expensive than last year. Turkey, the staple of Thanksgiving went up 21%. Its high cost can be attributed to not only inflation but a deadly strain of avian flu that wiped out 49 million turkeys this year. All in all, many Americans had to spend significantly more on their Thanksgiving feast this year. 

As Christmas approaches, it is likely that we will continue to see the trends from Black Friday and Thanksgiving. The corporations will continue to flourish while the average American will be left seeing a lot less bang for their buck. 

*As of November 2022

Here's how much more Thanksgiving dinner will cost you this year

Thanksgiving dinner will cost 20% more this year because of inflation

Inflation Might Be Cooling But Thanksgiving Dinner Prices Are Still Red-Hot

3 things that keep driving inflation so high—and raising the risk of recession

Your Thanksgiving dinner could cost 20% more this year because of inflation

GOP Candidate Refuses to Concede

Republicans flaunted polls throughout October, echoing the claims of an inevitable “Red Wave” that was going to happen this midterm election. With staggering inflation and President Biden’s slipping approval rating, it statistically made sense that Republicans could win a significant majority of the 35 senate seats and 435 house seats up for re-election in November. Unfortunately for Republicans, their “Red Wave” never materialized as Trump's unpopularity seemed to hinder his endorsements. Trump-endorsed senate candidates like Dr.Oz and Don Bolduc were defeated in Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, as they decided to cling to President Trump's claims that the 2020 election was stolen. Surprisingly, the majority of Trump's endorsements who were defeated conceded without the same defiance that President Trump modeled. 

Republican Kari Lake

This was not the case for all the candidates. In her campaign for governor of Arizona, Trump endorsed Kari Lake never accepted the results of the 2020 election, while stating that she would only concede the Arizona race if it was “fair, honest, and transparent”. She continued dodging comments from reporters saying, “I am going to win the election and I will accept that result”. Lake had no intention of accepting the results of the election and it was evident from the beginning of her campaign, so her recent refusal to concede should be no surprise. 

Lakes claims stem from issues with the voting machines in Maricopa County, the largest in Arizona, which were said to have some ballots with markings too light to be read by on-site tabulators. Lines were backed up amid the confusion, while Lake claimed that her voters were “dissuaded from voting as a result”. She filed public lawsuits, along with Republican attorney general candidate Abraham Hamedeh claiming “malfunctions” with the Maricopa County voting machines. What was largely left out of her claims was that the voters were given another box labeled Box 3, a collection box that would scan the 17,000 ballots that could not be scanned at the precinct-based vote counters. Along with this, Maricopa county said that 85% of the voting centers never had lines longer than 45 minutes. 

Lines to vote in Maricopa County, Az

Despite the evidence, one of Arizona's 15 counties failed to certify election results before the statutory deadline. Republican supervisors in Cochise County chose to not certify the results of the election, leading to a lawsuit from Hobbs (Lakes opponent) and lawyer Marc Elias. If they fail to certify the results by December 8th, the votes from the county will not be counted. Lake has continued to fight the legal battle, stating, “Rest assured I have assembled the best and brightest legal team, and we are exploring every avenue to correct the many wrongs that have been done this past week.”

This year's election day seemed calmer than what may have been expected, but remnants of Trump's rhetoric remain in the form of Kari Lake, a many Republicans are using election myths to explain a disastrous midterm. It is clear Lake is trying to ride the Trump wave of Republicans, attempting to prolong the certification of the election to appease those voters and potentially further her political career. Her commitment to Trump also makes her a potential VP candidate in his candidacy for 2024.

 

Trump and Lake at campaign rally 

Republican-controlled Arizona county refuses to certify 2022 election

Judge dismisses Arizona GOP AG candidate’s election lawsuit as premature

Lake refuses to concede in Arizona governor’s race she lost

Kari Lake and the Power of a Polished MAGA Message

Fire fuels protests over "zero Covid" lockdowns in China

 

    Throughout the entirety of the pandemic, China's Covid restriction policies have stood out as the most controlling and most strict in the world. This is because the use a "zero Covid" strategy, which seeks to reduce cases through strict quarantines, lockdowns and testing on a mass scale. While this policy has been effective in restricting the spread of Covid, it has led to the constant restriction of peoples freedoms leading to a growing dissent towards the government.

 

    Things were only made worse when last Thursday, a fire broke out in an apartment building in Urumqi, the regional capital of Xinjiang. At least ten people were killed and nine injured during the incident. Urumqi has been on full lockdown since August, so when the fire broke out, the response time was slowed due to the massive amounts of restrictions possibly contributing to the number of deaths and injuries.

    The incident was the final spark to peoples growing distaste for the strict Covid restrictions, as the people of Urumqi took to the streets in protest shortly following the incident calling out in chants of "end lockdowns."

    The protest in Urumqi was not an isolated event either. Across China, people are starting to take action against the government, and the "zero Covid" lockdowns that the government says is necessary to their safety. In Zhengzhou, workers at an iPhone factory turned to violence against hazmat-suited security officers over a delay in bonus payments and chaotic Covid rules. In Chongqing, a rallying speech was given by an individual protesting the lockdown in his residence saying, "Without freedom, I would rather die!" And in Shanghai residents boldly called for Xi Jinping and the Communist Party to step down.

    The government was quick to censor all media outlets regarding the protests, yet footage and images still spread across China and the rest of the world. This only added to the growing outrage at the imposed restrictions. 

    The main ethical dilemma revolves around peoples freedom versus their safety, and the government's power to regulate both. While the policies imposed by the government greatly restrict people's freedoms, the have had an undeniable impact on the impact on the limited spread of Covid in China. Yet, in my, and many others' opinions, these policies, and the methods in which they are being carried out, are simply not worth it at this point in the pandemic. 

    Since the protests, the government has said that they would ease lockdown measures in neighborhoods categorized as "low risk" by authorities "in stages." Yet, whether this will have any significant effect on peoples personal freedom remains to be seen.

Sources: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/27/world/asia/china-covid-protest.html?auth=login-google

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/26/asia/xinjiang-urumqi-china-lockdown-protests-intl-hnk/index.html

The most controversial World Cup ever is underway

The World Cup, the biggest sporting event of the biggest sport in the world, has officially started. The tournament watched by billions across the world is taking place 6 months later than it usually does due to the immense heat in the summers of the host country, Qatar. That is just one of the many (and one of the much less contentious)… to put it lightly… quirks of the World Cup in Qatar. 

Qatar, a small gulf state in the Middle East, has never qualified or played in a World Cup, and to many, it would seem to lack the size and necessary infrastructure to host one. So how, and why, is Qatar hosting the World Cup? Simply put, way, way, way, too much money. Qatar’s World Cup bid to FIFA was estimated to be at least $200 million, more than any other country before. According to the New York Times, “American investigators and FIFA itself have since said multiple FIFA board members accepted bribes to swing the vote to Qatar” -- just one of the numerous corruption scandals that top FIFA officials have been mired in over the last decade.

Qatar being revealed as the World Cup host

To prepare for the influx of players, staff, and more than 1.5 million fans, Qatar has also spent over $220 billion building roads, hotels, air-conditioned stadiums, and more, making it the most expensive World Cup ever (for reference, the second most expensive World Cup cost $14 billion in 2014). Although Qatar sits on massive pools of natural gas and oil responsible for making it the highest GDP per capita country in the world, it still seems hard to justify so much money for an event that lasts only one month. 

The controversial hosting of the World Cup has been overrun with criticism. Firstly, human rights advocates are alarmed by the Qatari government’s treatment of migrant workers it employed to build all of its ambitious infrastructure projects. 36 workers have died while completing the stadiums, and thousands have died in the last 10 years since construction began. There are reports of thousands of migrant workers being trapped and unable to leave their jobs, with workers reporting that employers have taken their passports and threatened them for complaining about living conditions. According to Amnesty International, ”staff of one labor supply company used the threat of penalties to exact work from some migrants such as withholding pay, handing workers over to the police or stopping them from leaving Qatar.” 

Secondly, being the first Islamic country to host a World Cup, many policies have been heavily criticized by western media: homosexuality is illegal in Qatar and punishable by up to 3 years in prison. Although Qatar has stated that it will “welcome all” for the World Cup, LGBTQ fans are staying away. Not all religions are treated equally, and someone found to be “proselytizing for other religions or criticizing Islam may be criminally prosecuted,” according to the US embassy in Qatar. Any speech that is also determined to be critical of the Qatari government is also grounds for arrest. On Friday, Qatar backtracked on a previous agreement and announced alcohol would be prohibited in and around stadiums, a ban that complicates Budweiser’s $75 million deal with FIFA. 

The "Rainbow Laces" campaign

While Qatar certainly is not as radical as a country like Saudi Arabia, Qatar’s general conservatism seems incongruent with recent progressive campaigns that have made their way through the soccer community, such as the English Premier League’s “Rainbow Laces” campaign, a show of support and inclusion for the LGBTQ+ community. 

Taking a step back and looking at all the corruption, human rights abuses, hundreds of billions of dollars, and media attention surrounding the World Cup, it is easy to wonder how a simple game is the root of all of it. The World Cup raises greater questions about our societal values: does society as a whole place too much emphasis, money, and time on sports when there are other more pressing issues at stake? Probably. But will billions of people still flock to their TVs to see Messi, Neymar, Mbappe, and Ronaldo show off their one-in-a-billion talent by running around a field for 90 minutes? Inevitably. 

World Cup final viewership

Sources:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/19/sports/soccer/world-cup-qatar-2022.html

https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/qatar-abuse-of-world-cup-workers-exposed/

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/19/football/qatar-world-cup-2022-lgbtq-rights-spt-intl/index.html

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/19/1137783957/world-cup-qatar-fan-restrictions-alcohol

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/sports/soccer/world-cup-beer-qatar.html

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/11/world-cup-2022-qatar-media