Rumeysa Ozturk Op-Ed

 This is the Op-Ed that got Rumeysa Ozturk arrested for "support for terrorism". 

https://www.tuftsdaily.com/article/2024/03/4ftk27sm6jkj

Op-ed: Try again, President Kumar: Renewing calls for Tufts to adopt March 4 TCU Senate resolutions

By Rumeysa Ozturk, Fatima Rahman, Genesis Perez and Nicholas Ambeliotis

Published Tuesday, March 26, 2024

 
 
 

On March 4, the Tufts Community Union Senate passed 3 out of 4 resolutions demanding that the University acknowledge the Palestinian genocide, apologize for University President Sunil Kumar’s statements, disclose its investments and divest from companies with direct or indirect ties to Israel. These resolutions were the product of meaningful debate by the Senate and represent a sincere effort to hold Israel accountable for clear violations of international law. Credible accusations against Israel include accounts of deliberate starvation and indiscriminate slaughter of Palestinian civilians and plausible genocide.

Unfortunately, the University’s response to the Senate resolutions has been wholly inadequate and dismissive of the Senate, the collective voice of the student body. Graduate Students for Palestine joins Tufts Students for Justice in Palestine, the Tufts Faculty and Staff Coalition for Ceasefire and Fletcher Students for Palestine to reject the University’s response. Although graduate students were not allowed by the University into the Senate meeting, which lasted for almost eight hours, our presence on campus and financial entanglement with the University via tuition payments and the graduate work that we do on grants and research makes us direct stakeholders in the University’s stance.

While an argument may be made that the University should not take political stances and should focus on research and intellectual exchange, the automatic rejection, dismissive nature and condescending tone in the University’s statement have caused us to question whether the University is indeed taking a stand against its own declared commitments to free speech, assembly and democratic expression. According to the Student Code of Conduct, “[a]ctive citizenship, including exercising free speech and engaging in protests, gatherings, and demonstrations, is a vital part of the Tufts community.” In addition, the Dean of Students Office has written, “[w]hile at times the exchange of controversial ideas and opinions may cause discomfort or even distress, our mission as a university is to promote critical thinking, the rigorous examination and discussion of facts and theories, and diverse and sometimes contradictory ideas and opinions.” Why then is the University discrediting and disregarding its students who practice the very ideals of critical thinking, intellectual exchange and civic engagement that Tufts claims to represent?

The role of the TCU Senate resolutions is abundantly clear. The Senate’s resolutions serve as a “strong lobbying tool that expresses to the Tufts administration the wants and needs of the student body. They speak as a collective voice and are instrumental in enacting systemic changes.” In this case, the “systemic changes” that the collective voice of the student body is calling for are for the University to end its complicity with Israel insofar as it is oppressing the Palestinian people and denying their right to self-determination — a right that is guaranteed by international law. These strong lobbying tools are all the more urgent now given the order by the International Court of Justice confirming that the Palestinian people of Gaza’s rights under the Genocide Convention are under a “plausible” risk of being breached.

This collective student voice is not without precedent. Today, the University may remember with pride its decision in February 1989 to divest from South Africa under apartheid and end its complicity with the then-racist regime. However, we must remember that the University divested up to 11 years after some of its peers. For instance, the Michigan State University Board of Regents passed resolutions to end its complicity with Apartheid South Africa as early as 1978. Had Tufts heeded the call of the student movement in the late 1970s, the University could have been on the right side of history sooner.

We reject any attempt by the University or the Office of the President to summarily dismiss the role of the Senate and mischaracterize its resolution as divisive. The open and free debate demonstrated by the Senate process (exemplified by the length, open notice and substantive exchange in the proceedings and the non-passing of one of the proposed resolutions), together with the serious organizing efforts of students, warrant credible self-reflection by the Office of the President and the University. We, as graduate students, affirm the equal dignity and humanity of all people and reject the University’s mischaracterization of the Senate’s efforts.

The great author and civil rights champion James Baldwin once wrote: “The paradox of education is precisely this: that as one begins to become conscious one begins to examine the society in which [they are] being educated.” As an educator, President Kumar should embrace efforts by students to evaluate “diverse and sometimes contradictory ideas and opinions.” Furthermore, the president should trust in the Senate’s rigorous and democratic process and the resolutions that it has achieved.

We urge President Kumar and the Tufts administration to meaningfully engage with and actualize the resolutions passed by the Senate.

This op-ed was written by Nick Ambeliotis (CEE, ‘25), Fatima Rahman (STEM Education, ‘27), Genesis Perez (English, ‘27) and Rumeysa Ozturk (CSHD, ‘25) and is endorsed by 32 other Tufts School of Engineering and Arts and Sciences Graduate Students.

First Principles of Government

 'An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads a man to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best laws. He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself'.

 - Thomas Paine, Dissertation on the First Principles of Government (1795).

We've seen Trump's plans before

 This all sounds familiar somehow. 🤔

In 1923 Adolf Hitler incited an insurrection against the German government. He was tried, given a slap on the wrist, and became a convicted felon. Despite being treated charitably by the judge, Hitler claimed the trial was political persecution and successfully portrayed himself as a victim of the “corrupt" Social Democrats. 

Hitler cleverly positioned himself as the voice of the "common man," railing against the "elites," cultural "degeneracy," and the establishment, who he all labeled as "Marxists." He claimed the education system was indoctrinating children to hate Germany, and promised to return Germany to greatness.

To solidify his base, Hitler masterfully scapegoated minorities for the nation's problems, exploiting societal divisions with an "us vs. them" narrative. Many Germans took the bait. Hitler's Nazi Party continued to gain traction, until he became Chancellor in 1933.

Hitler appointed German oligarchs as his economic advisors. He proceeded to privatize government run utilities, solidifying support of the economic elite.

With the working class divided along cultural and ethnic lines, the Nazis shut down workers unions and abolished strikes. 

Progressives and trade unionists were imprisoned and sent to concentration camps. Corporate profits skyrocketed while working class Germans lived paycheck to paycheck. 

Hitler, who became a billionaire while in office, knew he and his clan of oligarchs could get away with the scam if they constantly had an "enemy within" to blame while the corporatocracy robbed the country blind. 

An easy target was one of the smallest minorities. Hitler removed birthright citizenship rights of Jews and started rounding them up for mass deportations for being "illegally" in the country. 

The German press under Nazi rule highlighted instances of violence by Jews to convince the public that Jewish immigrants were a danger to the "real Germans." 

Hitler wasted no time dismantling democratic institutions. Loyalty wasn't just encouraged; it was demanded. Opponents were silenced. Media that dared to questioned[sic] him were vilified as "the enemy" and "Marxists."

Hitler's Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, bragged about how the Nazis were able to intimidate the media into giving them favorable coverage, and didn't need to give direct orders.

The Nazi regime and its followers collected all books they saw as promoting "degeneracy" or what would be considered "woke" today, and burned them in large bonfires. They also burned books that promoted class consciousness. 

Berlin had a thriving LGBTQ community in the 1920s, and even had the first transgender clinic. The Nazis burned it to the ground. LGBTQ people were sent to concentration camps and forced to wear triangle badges. Many were killed in the Holocaust. 

The Nazis also saw manhood as under threat by independent women who didn't rely on men. In 1934, Hitler proclaimed, “A women’s world is her her husband, her family, her children, her house." Laws that had protected women's rights were repealed and new laws were introduced to restrict women to the home and in their roles as wives and mothers. (This is actually part of Project 2025)

Reproductive rights were severely rolled back, and doctors who performed abortions could face the death penalty. 

Despite all of this, the German people didn't have a similar historical parallel to look upon as a warning.

Most Germans never acted like the sky was falling.

Most just went along with their lives as usual, until many of their lives were snuffed out. 

By the time Hitler's reign was forced to an end by the Allied Powers, 11 million people were murdered in the Holocaust, and 70-85 million were killed in WW2 .

Medical price transparency

Trump is claiming credit for making medical prices transparent.  

He didn't do shit. This was already in place! 

---- 

On December 11,2023 - the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the Lower Costs, More Transparency Act (H.R. 5378) by a vote of 320–71. If enacted, effective January 1, 2026, the bill will require ASCs to disclose to the public all standard charges and prices, including information relevant to ASCs on the list of 300 shoppable services or an indication that such service is not furnished by the ASC. This price transparency provision is similar to the price transparency legislation H.R. 4822 that ASCA reported on over the summer.

And 

BEFORE THAT 

Hospital price transparency helps Americans know the cost of a hospital item or service before receiving it. Starting January 1, 2021, each hospital operating in the United States will be required to provide clear, accessible pricing information online about the items and services they provide in two ways:

As a comprehensive machine-readable file with all items and services.

In a display of shoppable services in a consumer-friendly format.

Trump and the Panama Canal

 Trump says that he wants to take back the Panama Canal because the Canal Authority is "charging American shipping too much".  

As usual with Trump's irredentist ravings, this is nonsense.  But let's unpack it.  

The first question you have to ask is "what American shipping"?  The American merchant marine is not what it was at the end of WWII, when we had the largest merchant marine in the world.  

Disclaimer: I own shares in some of these corporations, and they have made me a lot of money. 

This is a list of the world's largest container ship lines. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_container_shipping_companies

You don't find an American line until you get to Matson at number 28, with 0.2% of world container capacity.  

This is a list of dry bulk shipping lines.  

https://www.marineinsight.com/know-more/biggest-bulk-shipping-companies/ 

You don't find an American dry bulk company until you get to Genco at number 10 with only 43 ships. 

This is a list of tanker ship companies.  

https://www.marineinsight.com/types-of-ships/top-12-tanker-shipping-companies-in-the-world/

You don't find an American tanker ship company until you get to Overseas Shipholding Group at number 12.  (I own shares in them. They aren't a good performer, but they're based in Tampa Bay, so it was a sentimental purchase. Fortunately, their stock is cheap.)  

There is a lot of crossover among these companies, with none of them concentrating on a single sector.  They are all transnational corporations.  

So again I ask, "what American shipping"?  

Looking at the Canal itself, fortunately, the Canal Authority publishes statistics for Canal transits.  

https://pancanal.com/en/statistics/

Selecting for laden transits by flag, the largest single flag is Liberia.  No surprise there, because Liberia is the most popular open registry, so it is the flag of convenience for a lot of the world's shipping.  United States flagged vessels are number 15 on that list.  

Again I ask, "what American shipping"?  

If you look at the graph by route, the number one route is between the US east coast and Asia.  

88,428,454 of the total 210,306,847 long tons transiting the Canal are between Asia and US east coast ports, or a little over 42%.  But again, considering this freight is almost all on non-US carriers, is it really "American" shipping?  

Then there is the question of how much the Canal Authority is charging for transit.  The Panama Canal Tariff Schedule is complex, and is available here: 

https://pancanal.com/en/maritime-services/maritime-tariff/

Needless to say, shipping companies have professionals to wade through this mess.  

The font of all knowledge, Google, says

"According to available information, the average cost per ton to transit the Panama Canal is not a fixed number, but varies depending on the ship's size and type, with estimates ranging around $2- $3 per ton; however, the exact cost is calculated based on a complex system considering the vessel's length, beam, and Panama Canal Universal Measurement System (PC/UMS) tonnage, making it difficult to give a single "average" cost per ton."  

The Canal Authority Tariff Schedule puts the cost per container at $30-45 per twenty foot equivalent container.  Considering that the cost for transporting that container will already be anywhere from $2000 to $10,000 depending on a number of factors, the $45 tariff is pocket change.  

For bulk freight, the Tariff Schedule puts the cost at around $1.50 per long ton.  A large bulker would pay a fee for the ship, and an additional fee for the freight.  A bulker exporting, say, 60,000 tons of wheat would pay about $90,000 for the freight and another $60-100,000 for the vessel.  But again, the cost of shipping dry bulk freight is already $23-27 per ton, so the additional $3-4 per ton is only a slightly larger cost.  

If you're interested enough then you can calculate the full fee using the tariff estimator here: 

https://www.wilhelmsen.com/tollcalculators/panama-toll-calculator/

The whole point of the Canal is that going through it saves time, fuel, and ultimately money.  Yes, going through the Canal costs a lot of money.  For a Panamax class container ship the tariff may be over a million dollars.  But that passage may save several million dollars worth of fuel and under way time, not to mention weeks in sailing time.  

Also consider that a container ship may be carrying cargo worth billions.  Literally several times the value of the ship itself.  At that point the cost of the Canal passage amortizes pretty quickly, in addition to the savings on fuel.  

Looking at all of this, there is one important thing to consider: Ships don't have to go through the Canal.  The problem is that the options are not good.  One option is to go around Cape Horn, through the Straights of Magellan, which is about 8000 miles longer, and subject to violent weather.  The shortest route from Asia to the US east coast is actually the Arctic Sea Route, but that is only available for a few weeks in the summer, and requires an ice strengthened hull.  Another option is the Atlantic route through the Suez Canal, but because of the geopolitical situation in the middle east that can be problematic.  The final option is to go around the Cape of Good Hope on the southern tip of Africa.  Any way you slice it, the Panama Canal is the best option.  Being good capitalists, they charge accordingly.  Despite the tolls, ships still save millions over going other routes. 

This doesn't touch the fact that operating and maintaining the Canal is expensive.  The operating budget for the Canal is $5.7 Billion per year.  That budget comes entirely from tolls. 

In summary, Trump's claim that the Panama Canal Authority is overcharging American shipping is entirely irredentist nonsense from hat to boots.